LIBRARY 

OF  THE 

University  of  California. 

Class 

d 


COLUMBIA    UNIVERSITY    STUDIES    IN    ENGLISH 
Series  II.  Vol.  II,   No.  1. 


SIR  WALTER  SCOTT 

AS  A  CRITIC  OF  LITERATURE 


This  Monograph  has  been  approved  by  the  Department 
of  English  in  Columbia  University  as  a  contribution  to 
knowledge  worthy  of  publication. 

A.   H.   THORNDIKE, 

Secretary. 


SIR  WALTER  SCOTT 


AS  A  CRITIC  OF  LITERATURE 


BY 


MARGARET   BALL,  Ph.D. 


THE    COLUMBIA   UNIVERSITY    PRESS 
1907 


'■WflM, 


Copyright,   1907 
By  The  Columbia  University  Press 

Printed  from  type  November,  1907 


Press  of 

The  New  era  Printing  company 

Lancaster,  pa. 


PREFACE 

The  lack  of  any  adequate  discussion  of  Scott's  critical  work 
is  a  sufficient  reason  for  the  undertaking  of  this  study,  the 
subject  of  which  was  suggested  to  me  more  than  three  years 
ago  by  Professor  Trent  of  Columbia  University.  We  still 
use  critical  essays  and  monumental  editions  prepared  by  the 
author  of  the  Waverley  novels,  but  the  criticism  has  been  so 
overshadowed  by  the  romances  that  its  importance  is  scarcely 
recognized.  It  is  valuable  in  itself,  as  well  as  in  the  oppor- 
tunity it  offers  of  considering  the  relation  of  the  critical  to  the 
creative  mood,  an  especially  interesting  problem  when  it  is 
presented  concretely  in  the  work  of  a  great  writer. 

No  complete  bibliography  of  Scott's  writings  has  been  pub- 
lished, and  perhaps  none  is  possible  in  the  case  of  an  author 
who  wrote  so  much  anonymously.  The  present  attempt  in- 
cludes some  at  least  of  the  books  and  articles  commonly  left 
unnoticed,  which  are  chiefly  of  a  critical  or  scholarly  character. 

I  am  glad  to  record  my  gratitude  to  Professor  William 
Allan  Neilson,  now  of  Harvard  University,  and  to  Professors 
A.  H.  Thorndike,  W.  W.  Lawrence,  G.  P.  Krapp,  and  J.  E. 
Spingarn,  of  Columbia,  for  suggestions  in  connection  with 
various  parts  of  the  work.  From  the  beginning  Professor 
Trent  has  helped  me  constantly  by  his  advice  as  well  as  by  the 
inspiration  of  his  scholarship,  and  my  debt  to  him  is  one 
which  can  be  understood  only  by  the  many  students  who  have 
known  his  kindness. 

Mount  Holyoke  College, 
June,  1907. 


CONTENTS 

CHAPTER    I. 
Introduction  :  An  Outline  of  Scott's  Literary  Career 1 

CHAPTER    II. 
Scott's  Qualifications  as  Critic   9 

CHAPTER    III. 
Scott's  Work  as  Student  and  Editor  in  the  Field  of  Literary 
History 

1.  The  Mediaeval  Period   

(a)  Minstrelsy  of  the  Scottish  Border  17 

(b)  Studies  in  the  Romances  32 

(c)  Other  Studies  in  Mediaeval  Literature   40 

2.  The  Drama  46 

3.  The  Seventeenth  Century :  Dryden   59 

4.  The  Eighteenth  Century    

(a)  Swift  65 

(b)  The  Somers  Tracts   70 

(c)  The  Lives  of  the  Novelists,  and  Comments  on  other 

Eighteenth  Century  Writers   72 

CHAPTER    IV. 
Scott's  Criticism  of  His  Contemporaries  81 

CHAPTER   V. 
Scott  as  a  Critic  of  His  Own  Work  108 

CHAPTER    VI. 
Scott's   Position   as  Critic 134 

APPENDICES 

I.  Bibliography  of  Scott,  Annotated 147 

II.  List  of  Books   Quoted 174 

Index     179 


A  DATED  LIST  OF  SCOTT'S  BOOKS,  ASIDE  FROM 
THE  POEMS  AND  NOVELS,  AND  OF  THE  PRIN- 
CIPAL WORKS  WHICH  HE  EDITED   (PERI- 
ODICAL   CRITICISM    NOT    INCLUDED). 

1802-3     Minstrelsy  of  the  Scottish  Border  (edited). 

1804        Sir  Tristrem   (edited). 

1806         Original    Memoirs   written    during"   the   Great   Civil 

War ;  the  Life  of  Sir  H.  Slingsby,  and  Memoirs 

of  Capt.  Hodgson  (edited). 
1808         Memoirs  of  Capt.  Carleton  (edited). 
1808         The  Works  of  John  Dryden  (edited). 
1808         Memoirs  of  Robert  Carey,  Earl  of  Monmouth,  and 

Fragmenta  Regalia  (edited). 

1808  Oueenhoo  Hall,  a  Romance ;  and  Ancient  Times,  a 

Drama  (edited). 

1809  The  State  Papers  and  Letters  of  Sir  Ralph  Sadler 

(edited). 
1809-15  The  Somers  Tracts  (edited). 
181 1         Memoirs  of  the  Court  of  Charles  II,  by  Count  Gram- 

mont  (edited). 
181 1         Secret    History    of   the    Court   of   James    the    First 

(edited). 

1813  Memoirs  of  the  Reign  of  King  Charles  I,  by  Sir  Philip 

Warwick  (edited). 

1814  The  Works  of  Jonathan  Swift  (edited). 

1 814-17  The  Border  Antiquities  of  England  and  Scotland. 
1816         Paul's  Letters. 

1 818  Essay  on  Chivalry. 

1819  Essay  on  the  Drama. 

1819-26  Provincial   Antiquities   and    Picturesque   Scenery  of 
Scotland. 

1820  Trivial  Poems  and  Triolets  by  Patrick  Carey  (edited). 

1821  Northern    Memoirs,   calculated   for   the   Meridian   of 

Scotland ;    and    the    Contemplative    and    Practical 
Angler  (edited). 


1821-24  The  Novelists'  Library  (edited). 

1822         Chronological   Notes  of   Scottish  Affairs  from   1680 

till  1701   (edited). 
1822         Military  Memoirs  of  the  Great  Civil  War  (edited). 
1824        Essay  on  Romance. 

1826  Letters  of  Malachi  Malagrowther  on  the  Currency. 

1827  The  Life  of  Napoleon  Buonaparte. 

1828  Tales  of  a  Grandfather,  first  series. 
1828        Religious  Discourses,  by  a  Layman. 

1828  Proceedings   in   the   Court-martial   held   upon   John, 

Master  of  Sinclair,  etc.  (edited). 

1829  Memorials  of  George  Bannatyne  (edited). 

1829  Tales  of  a  Grandfather,  second  series. 

1829-32  The  "Opus  Magnum"  (Novels,  Tales,  and  Ro- 
mances, with  Introductions  and  Notes  by  the 
Author). 

1830  Tales  of  a  Grandfather,  third  series. 
1830         Letters  on  Dernonology  and  Witchcraft. 

1830  History  of  Scotland. 

1 83 1  Tales  of  a  Grandfather,  fourth  series. 
1831         Trial  of  Duncan  Terig,  etc.  (edited). 


1890         The  Journal  of  Sir  Walter  Scott. 
1894         Familiar  Letters  of  Sir  Walter  Scott. 


■  ; 


CHAPTER    I 

Introduction 

Importance  of  a  study  of  Scott's  critical  and  scholarly  work  —  Con- 
nection between  his  creative  work  and  his  criticism  —  Chronological 
view  of  his  literary  career. 

Scott's  critical  work  has  become  inconspicuous  because  of 
his  predominant  fame  as  an  imaginative  writer;  but  what  it 
loses  on  this  account  it  perhaps  gains  in  the  special  interest 
attaching  to  criticism  formulated  by  a  great  creative  artist. 
One  phase  of  his  work  is  emphasized  and  explained  by 
the  other,  and  we  cannot  afford  to  ignore  his  criticism  if  we 
attempt  fairly  to  comprehend  his  genius  as  a  poet  and  novelist. 
The  fact  that  he  is  the  subject  of  one  of  the  noblest  biographies 
in  our  language  only  increases  our  obligation  to  become  ac- 
quainted with  his  own  presentation  of  his  artistic  principles. 

But  though  criticism  by  so  great  and  voluminous  a  writer 
is  valuable  mainly  because  of  the  important  relation  it  bears 
to  his  other  work,  and  because  of  the  authority  it  derives  from 
this  relation,  Scott's  scholarly  and  critical  writings  are  indi- 
vidual enough  in  quality  and  large  enough  in  extent  to  demand 
consideration  on  their  own  merits.  Yet  this  part  of  his  achieve- 
ment has  received  very  little  attention  from  biographers  and 
critics.  Lockhart's  book  is  indeed  full  of  materials,  and  con- 
tains also  some  suggestive  comment  on  the  facts  presented ; 
but  as  the  passing  of  time  has  made  an  estimation  of  Scott's 
power  more  safe,  students  have  lost  interest  in  his  work  as  a 
ciitic,  and  recent  writers  have  devoted  little  attention  to  this 
aspect  of  the  great  man  of  letters.1 

1  Mr.  Hutton's  Life  of  Scott,  in  the  English  Men  of  Letters  series,  con- 
tains no  chapter  nor  any  extended  passage  on  Scott's  critical  and  scholarly 
work,  though  there  is  a  chapter  on  "  Scott's  Morality  and  Religion,"  and 
one  on  "  Scott  as  a  Politician."  This,  like  the  other  short  biographies  of 
Scott,  is  professedly  a  compilation,  so  far  as  its  facts  are  concerned,  from 
Lockhart's  book.  The  Lives  of  Scott  by  Gilfillan  and  by  Mackenzie,  pub- 
lished about  the  time  of  the  Scott  centenary  in  1871,  are  longer  than  Hut- 
1  1 


2  SCOTT   AS   A   CRITIC    OF   LITERATURE 

The  present  study  is  an  attempt  to  show  the  scope  and 
quality  of  Scott's  critical  writings,  and  of  such  works,  not 
exclusively  or  mainly  critical,  as  exhibit  the  range  of  his  schol- 
arship. For  it  is  impossible  to  treat  his  criticism  without  dis- 
cussing his  scholarship ;  since,  lightly  as  he  carried  it,  this  was 
of  consequence  in  itself  and  in  its  influence  on  all  that  he  did. 
The  materials  for  analysis  are  abundant;  and  by  rearrange- 
ment and  special  study  they  may  be  made  to  contribute  both 
to  the  history  of  criticism  and  to  our  comprehension  of  the 
power  of  a  great  writer.  In  considering  him  from  this  point 
of  view  we  are  bound  to  remember  the  connection  between 
the  different  parts  of  his  vocation.  In  him,  more  than  in  most 
men  of  letters,  the  critic  resembled  the  creative  writer,  and 
though  the  critical  temperament  seems  to  show  itself  but  rarely 
in  his  romances,  we  find  that  the  characteristic  absence  of  pre- 
cise and  conscious  art  is  itself  in  harmony  with  his  critical  creed. 

The  relation  between  the  different  parts  of  Scott's  literary 
work  is  exemplified  by  the  subjects  he  treated,  for  as  a  critic 
he  touched  many  portions  of  the  field,  which  in  his  capacity  of 
poet  and  novelist  he  occupied  in  a  different  way.  He  was  a 
historical  critic  no  less  than  a  historical  romancer.  A  larger 
proportion  of  his  criticism  concerns  itself  with  the  eighteenth 
century,  perhaps,  than  of  his  fiction,1  and  he  often  wrote  re- 
ton's,  but  contain  no  more  extended  reference  to  the  critical  writings. 
Mackenzie's  book  out  of  nearly  five  hundred  pages  gives  only  one  to  a 
discussion  of  the  edition  of  Dryden,  and  half  a  page  to  an  account  of  the 
establishment  of  the  Quarterly  Review.  Gilfillan  characterizes  the  critical 
work  in  almost  as  short  a  space,  but  with  a  good  deal  of  judgment.  The 
German  biography  of  Scott  contemporary  with  these,  by  Dr.  Felix  Eberty, 
is  concerned  with  the  man  rather  than  his  works.  Of  later  Lives  of  Scott, 
Prof.  Saintsbury's  gives,  in  proportion  to  its  length,  more  space  than  any 
other  to  Scott's  critical  work,  but  the  book  has  only  a  hundred  and  fifty- 
five  pages  in  all.  Another  recent  biographer,  Mr.  W.  H.  Hudson,  says  of 
Scott's  editorial  and  critical  work,  "  these  exertions,  though  they  call  for 
passing  record,  occupy  a  minor  place  in  his  story  "  ;  and  he  gives  them 
only  "  passing  record."  Mr.  Andrew  Lang's  still  more  recent  and  briefer 
Sir  Walter  Scott  devotes  only  a  few  lines  here  and  there  to  comment  on 
Scott  as  a  critic,  and  contains  hardly  even  a  reference  to  the  little-known 
volumes  that  he  edited. 

1  Ten  of  Scott's  twenty-seven  novels  (counting  the  first  series  of  Chron- 
icles of  the  Canongate  as  one)  have  scenes  laid  in  the  eighteenth  century. 
They  are  as  follows,  arranged  approximately  in  the  order  of  their  periods : 


INTRODUCTION  S 

views  of  contemporary  literature,  but  on  the  whole  the  litera- 
ture with  which  he  dealt  critically  was  representative  of  those 
periods  of  time  which  he  chose  to  portray  in  novel  and  poem. 
This  evidently  implies  great  breadth  of  scope.  Yet  Scott's 
vivid  sense  of  the  past  had  its  bounds,  as  Professor  Masson 
pointed  out.1  It  was  the  "  Gothic "  past  that  he  venerated. 
The  field  of  his  studies,  chronologically  considered,  included 
the  period  between  his  own  time  and  the  crusades ;  and  geo- 
graphically, was  in  general  confined  to  England  and  Scotland, 
with  comparatively  rare  excursions  abroad.  When,  in  his  novels, 
he  carried  his  Scottish  or  English  heroes  out  of  Britain  into 
foreign  countries,  he  was  apt  to  bestow  upon  them  not  only  a 
special  endowment  of  British  feeling,  but  also  a  portion  of 
that  interest  in  their  native  literature  which  marked  the  taste 
of  their  creator.  We  find  that  the  personages  in  his  books  are 
often  distinguished  by  that  love  of  stirring  poetry,  particularly 
of  popular  and  national  poetry,  which  was  a  dominant  trait  in 
Scott's  whole  literary  career. 

With  Scotland  and  with  popular  poetry  any  discussion  of 
Sir  Walter  properly  begins.  The  love  of  Scottish  minstrelsy 
first  awakened  his  literary  sense,  and  the  stimulus  supplied  by 
ballads  and  romances  never  lost  its  force.  We  may  say  that 
the  little  volumes  of  ballad  chap-books  which  he  collected  and 
bound  up  before  he  was  a  dozen  years  old  suggested  the  future 
editor,  as  the  long  poem  on  the  Conquest  of  Grenada,  which  he 
is  said  to  have  written  and  burned  when  he  was  fifteen,  fore- 
shadowed the  poet  and  romancer. 

Yet  Scott's  career  as  an  author  began  rather  late.  He  pub- 
lished a  few  translations  when  he  was  twenty-five  years  old, 
but  his  first  notable  work,  the  Minstrelsy  of  the  Scottish  Border, 
did  not  appear  until  1802-3,  when  he  was  over  thirty.  This 
book,  the  outgrowth  of  his  early  interest  in  ballads  and  his  own 
attempts  at  versifying,  exhibited  both  his  editorial  and  his 
creative  powers.     It  led  up  to  the  publication  of  two  important 

The  Bride  of  Lammcrmoor.  The  Pirate,  The  Black  Dwarf,  Rob  Roy,  The 
Heart  of  Midlothian,  Waverlcy,  Guy  Manncring,  Redgauntlet,  Chronicles  of 
the  Canongate  (First  series),  The  Antiquary.  The  long  poems  all  found 
their  setting  in  earlier  periods. 

1  British  Novelists  and  their  Styles,  pp.  167-8. 


4  SCOTT   AS   A    CRITIC   OF   LITERATURE 

volumes  which  contained  material  originally  intended  to  form 
part  of  the  Minstrelsy,  but  which  outgrew  that  work.  These 
were  the  edition  of  the  old  metrical  romance  Sir  Tristrem,  which 
showed  Scott  as  a  scholar,  and  the  Lay  of  the  Last  Minstrel, 
the  first  of  Scott's  own  metrical  romances.  So  far  his  literary 
achievement  was  all  of  one  kind,  or  of  two  or  three  kinds 
closely  related.  In  this  first  period  of  his  literary  life,  perhaps 
even  more  than  later,  his  editorial  impulse,  his  scholarly  activ- 
ity, was  closely  connected  with  the  inspiration  for  original 
writing.  The  Lay  of  the  Last  Minstrel  was  the  climax  of  this 
series  of  enterprises. 

With  the  publication  of  the  Minstrelsy,  Scott  of  course 
became  known  as  a  literary  antiquary.  He  was  naturally  called 
upon  for  help  when  the  Edinburgh  Review  was  started  a  few 
weeks  afterwards,  especially  as  Jeffrey,  who  soon  became  the 
editor,  had  long  been  his  friend.  The  articles  that  he  wrote 
during  1803  and  1804  were  of  a  sort  that  most  evidently  con- 
nected itself  with  the  work  he  had  been  doing:  reviews,  for 
example,  of  Southey's  Amadis  de  Gaul,  and  of  Ellis's  Early 
English  Poetry.  During  1805-6  the  range  of  his  reviewing 
became  wider  and  he  included  some  modern  books,  especially 
two  or  three  which  offered  opportunity  for  good  fun-making. 
About  1806,  however,  his  aversion  to  the  political  principles 
which  dominated  the  Edinburgh  Review  became  so  strong  that 
he  refused  to  continue  as  a  contributor,  and  only  once,  years 
later,  did  he  again  write  an  article  for  that  periodical. 

In  the  same  year,  1806,  Scott  supplied  with  editorial  appa- 
ratus and  issued  anonymously  Original  Memoirs  Written 
during  the  Great  Civil  War,  the  first  of  what  proved  to  be  a 
long  list  of  publications  having  historical  interest,  sometimes 
reprints,  sometimes  original  editions  from  old  manuscripts,  to 
which  he  contributed  a  greater  or  less  amount  of  material  in 
the  shape  of  introductions  and  notes.  These  were  undertaken 
in  a  few  cases  for  money,  in  others  simply  because  they  struck 
him  as  interesting  and  useful  labors.  It  is  easy  to  trace  the 
relation  of  this  to  his  other  work,  particularly  to  the  novels. 
He  once  wrote  to  a  friend,  "  The  editing  a  new  edition  of 
Somers's  Tracts  some  years  ago  made  me  wonderfully  well 


INTRODUCTION  D 

acquainted  with  the  little  traits  which  marked  parties  and  char- 
acters in  the  seventeenth  century,  and  the  embodying  them  is 
really  an  amusing  task."1  Among  the  works  which  he  edited 
in  this  way  the  number  of  historical  memoirs  is  noticeable. 
After  the  volume  that  has  been  mentioned  as  the  first,  he  pre- 
pared another  book  of  Memoirs  of  the  Great  ( 'ivil  War;  and 
we  find  in  the  list  a  Secret  History  of  the  Court  of  James  I., 
Memoirs  of  the  Reign  of  King  Charles  I.,  Count  Grammont's 
Memoirs  of  the  Court  of  Charles  II.,  A  History  of  Queen 
Elizabeth's  Favourites,  etc.  Such  books  as  these,  besides  fur- 
nishing material  for  his  novels,  led  Scott  to  acquire  a  mass  of 
information  that  enabled  him  to  perform  with  great  facility 
and  with  admirable  results  whatever  editorial  work  he  might 
choose  to  undertake. 

These  labors  Scott  always  considered  as  trifles  to  be  dis- 
patched in  the  odd  moments  of  his  time,  but  the  great  edition 
of  Dryden's  Complete  Works,  which  he  began  to  prepare  soon 
after  the  Minstrelsy  appeared,  was  more  important.  This, 
next  to  the  Minstrelsy,  was  probably  the  most  notable  of  all 
Scott's  editorial  enterprises.  It  was  published  in  eighteen 
volumes  in  1808,  the  year  in  which  Marmion  also  appeared. 
When  the  poet  was  reproached  by  one  of  his  friends  for  not 
working  more  steadily  at  his  vocation,  he  replied,  "  The  public, 
with  many  other  properties  of  spoiled  children,  has  all  their 
eagerness  after  novelty,  and  were  I  to  dedicate  my  time  en- 
tirely to  poetry  they  would  soon  tire  of  me.  I  must  therefore, 
I  fear,  continue  to  edit  a  little."2  His  interest  in  scholarly 
pursuits  appears  even  in  his  first  attempt  at  writing  prose 
fiction,  since  Joseph  Strutt's  unfinished  romance,  Queenhoo 
Hall,  for  which  Scott  wrote  a  conclusion,  is  of  consequence 
only  on  account  of  the  antiquarian  learning  which  it  exhibits. 

Having  become  seriously  alarmed  over  the  political  influence 
of  the  Edinburgh  Rcvieze,  Scott  was  active  in  forwarding  plans 
for  starting  a  strong  rival  periodical  in  London,  and  1809  saw 
the  establishment  of  the  Quarterly  Reviezv.  By  that  time  he 
had  done  a  considerable  amount  of  work  in  practically  every 

1  Familiar  Letters,  Vol.  II,  p.  9. 

2  Ibid.,   Vol.    I,   p.    194. 


6  SCOTT   AS   A   CRITIC   OF   LITERATURE 

kind  except  the  novel,  and  he  was  recognized  as  a  most  efficient 
assistant  and  adviser  in  any  such  enterprise  as  the  promoters 
of  the  Quarterly  were  undertaking.  Moreover,  his  own  writ- 
ings were  prominent  among  the  books  which  supplied  material 
for  the  reviewer.  He  worked  hard  for  the  first  volume.  But 
after  that  year  he  wrote  little  for  the  Quarterly  until  1818,  and 
again  little  until  after  Lockhart  became  editor  in  1825.  From 
that  time  until  1831  he  was  an  occasional  contributor. 

1 814  was  the  year  of  Waverley.  Before  that  the  poems  had 
been  appearing  in  rapid  succession,  and  Scott  had  been  busy 
with  the  Works  of  Swift,  which  came  out  also  in  1814.  The 
thirteen  volumes  of  the  edition  of  S outers'  Tracts,  already 
mentioned,  and  several  smaller  books,  bore  further  witness  to 
his  editorial  energy.  The  last  of  the  long  poems  was  published 
in  181 5,  about  the  same  time  with  Guy  Mannering,  the  second 
novel,  and  after  that  the  novels  continued  to  appear  with  that 
rapidity  which  constitutes  one  of  the  chief  facts  of  Scott's 
literary  career.  For  a  few  years  after  this  period  he  did  com- 
paratively little  in  the  way  of  editorial  work,  but  his  odd  mo- 
ments were  occupied  in  writing  about  history,  travels,  and 
antiquities.1 

In  1820  Scott  wrote  the  Lives  of  the  Novelists,  which  ap- 
peared the  next  year  in  Ballantyne's  Novelists'  Library.  By 
this  time  he  had  begun,  with  Ivanhoe,  to  strike  out  from  the 
Scottish  field  in  which  all  his  first  novels  had  been  placed. 
The  martial  pomp  prominent  in  this  novel  reflects  the  eager 
interest  with  which  he  was  at  that  time  following  his  son's 
opening  career  in  the  army;  just  as  Marmion,  written  by  the 
young  quartermaster  of  the  Edinburgh  Light  Horse,  also 
expresses  the  military  ardor  which  was  so  natural  to  Scott,  and 
which  reminds  us  of  his  remark  that  in  those  days  a  regiment 
of  dragoons  was  tramping  through  his  head  day  and  night. 
Probably  we  might  trace  many  a  reason  for  his  literary  pre- 
occupations at  special  times  besides  those  that  he  has  himself 
commented  upon.  -  In  the  case  of  the  critical  work,  however, 

1  See  particularly  Paul's  Letters  ;  Provincial  Antiquities  ;  and  the  Histories 
of  the  years  1814  and  1815,  each  a  respectable  volume,  written  for  the 
Edinburgh  Annual  Register. 


I  \  rRODTJI  HON  7 

the  matter  was  usually  determined  for  him  by  circumstances 
of  a  much  less  intimate  sort,  such  as  the  appeal  of  an  editor  or 
the  appearance  of  a  hook  which  excited  his  special  interest. 

When  Scott  was  obliged  to  make  as  much  money  as  possible 
he  wrote  novels  and  histories  rather  than  criticism.  His  Life 
of  Napoleon  Buonaparte,  which  appeared  in  nine  volumes  in 
1827,  enabled  him  to  make  the  first  large  payment  on  the  debts 
that  had  fallen  upon  him  in  the  financial  crash  of  the  preceding 
year,  and  the  Talcs  of  a  Grandfather  were  among  the  most 
successful  of  his  later  books.  His  critical  biographies  and 
many  of  his  other  essays  were  brought  together  for  the  first 
time  in  1827,  and  issued  under  the  title  of  Miscellaneous  Prose 
Works.  The  world  of  books  was  making  his  life  weary  with 
its  importunate  demands  in  those  years  when  he  was  writing 
to  pay  his  debts,  and  it  is  pleasant  to  see  that  some  of  his  later 
reviews  discussed  matters  that  were  not  less  dear  to  his  heart 
because  they  were  not  literary.  The  articles  on  fishing,  on 
ornamental  gardening,  on  planting  waste  lands,  remind  us  of 
the  observation  he  once  made,  that  his  oaks  would  outlast  his 
laurels. 

By  this  time  the  "  Author  of  Waverley  "  was  no  longer  the 
"  unknown."  His  business  complications  compelled  him  to 
give  his  name  to  the  novels,  and  with  the  loss  of  a  certain  kind 
of  privacy  he  gained  the  freedom  of  which  later  he  made  such 
fortunate  use  in  annotating  his  own  works.  From  the  begin- 
ning of  1828  until  the  end  of  his  life  in  1832,  Scott  was  en- 
gaged, in  the  intervals  of  other  occupations,  in  writing  these 
introductions  and  notes  for  his  novels,  for  an  edition  which  he 
always  called  the  Opus  Magnum.  This  was  a  pleasant  task, 
charmingly  done.  Indeed  we  may  call  it  the  last  of  those 
great  editorial  labors  by  which  Scott's  fame  might  live  unsup- 
ported by  anything  else.  First  came  the  Minstrelsy  of  the 
Scottish  Border,  then  the  editions  of  Dryden  and  Swift.  Next 
we  may  count  the  Lives  of  the  Arovelists,  even  in  the  frag- 
mentary state  in  which  the  failure  of  the  Novelists'  Library 
left  them;  and  finally  the  Opus  Magnum.  When,  in  addition, 
we  remember  the  mass  of  his  critical  work  written  for  period- 
icals, and  the  number  of  minor  volumes  he  edited,  it  becomes 


8  SCOTT   AS   A    CRITIC   OF   LITERATURE 

evident  that  a  study  of  Scott  which  disregards  this  part  of  his 
work  can  present  only  a  one-sided  view  of  his  achievement. 
And  the  qualities  of  his  abundant  criticism,  especially  its  large 
fresh  sanity,  seem  to  make  it  worthy  of  closer  analysis  than 
it  usually  receives,  not  only  because  it  helps  to  reveal  Scott's 
genius,  but  also  on  account  of  the  historical  and  ethical  impor- 
tance which  always  attaches  to  the  ideals,  literary  and  other, 
of  a  noble  man  and  a  great  writer. 


CHAPTER    II 
Scott's  Qualifications  as  Critic 

Wide  reading  Scott's  first  qualification  —  Scott  the  antiquary  —  Char- 
acter of  his  interest  in  history  —  His  imagination  —  His  knowledge  of 
practical  affairs  —  Common-sense  in  criticism  —  Cheerfulness,  good- 
humor,  and  optimism  —  General  aspect  of  Scott's  critical  work. 

Wide  and  appreciative  reading  was  Scott's  first  qualification 
for  critical  work.  A  memory  that  retained  an  incredible 
amount  of  what  he  read  was  the  second.  One  of  the  severest 
censures  he  ever  expressed  was  in  regard  to  Godwin,  who,  he 
thought,  undertook  to  do  scholarly  work  without  adequate 
equipment.  "  We  would  advise  him,"  Scott  said  in  his  review 
of  Godwin's  Life  of  Chancer,  "  in  future  to  read  before  he 
writes,  and  not  merely  while  he  is  writing."  Scott  himself  had 
accumulated  a  store  of  literary  materials,  and  he  used  them 
according  to  the  dictates  of  a  temperament  which  had  vivid 
interests  on  many  sides. 

We  may  distinguish  three  points  of  view  which  were  habitual 
to  Scott,  and  which  determined  the  direction  of  his  creative 
work,  as  wrell  as  the  tone  of  his  criticism.  These  were — as  all 
the  world  knows — the  historical,  the  romantic,  the  practical. 

He  was,  as  he  often  chose  to  call  himself,  an  antiquary;  he 
felt  the  appeal  of  all  that  was  old  and  curious.  But  he  was 
much  more  than  that.  The  typical  antiquary  has  his  mind  so 
thoroughly  devoted  to  the  past  that  the  present  seems  remote 
to  him.  The  sheer  intellectual  capacity  of  such  a  man  as  Scott 
might  be  enough  to  save  him  from  such  a  limitation,  for  he 
could  give  to  the  past  as  much  attention  as  an  ordinary  man 
could  muster,  and  still  have  interest  for  contemporary  affairs ; 
but  his  capacity  was  not  all  that  saved  Scott.  He  viewed  the 
past  always  as  filled  with  living  men,  whose  chief  occupation 
was  to  think  and  feel  rather  than  to  provide  towers  and  armor 

9 


10  SCOTT   AS   A   CRITIC    OF   LITERATURE 

for  the  delectation  of  future  antiquaries.1  A  sympathetic  stu- 
dent of  his  work  has  said,  "  There  is  .  .  .  throughout  the 
poetry  of  this  author,  even  when  he  leads  us  to  the  remotest 
wildernesses  and  the  most  desolate  monuments  of  antiquity,  a 
constant  reference  to  the  feelings  of  man  in  his  social  condi- 
tion." -  The  past,  to  the  author  of  Kenilworth,  was  only  the 
far  end  of  the  present,  and  he  believed  that  the  most  useful 
result  of  the  study  of  history  is  a  comprehension  of  the  real 
quality  of  one's  own  period  and  a  wisdom  in  the  conduct  of 
present  day  affairs.3 

The  favorite  pursuits  of  Scott's  youth  indicate  that  his  char- 
acteristic taste  showed  itself  early;  indeed  it  is  said  that  he 
retained  his  boyish  traits  more  completely  than  most  people  do. 
We  can  trace  much  of  his  love  of  the  past  to  the  family 
traditions  which  made  the  adventurous  life  of  his  ancestors 
vividly  real  to  him.  The  annals  of  the  Scotts  were  his  earliest 
study,  and  he  developed  such  an  affection  for  his  freebooting 
grandsires  that  in  his  manhood  he  confessed  to  an  unconquer- 
able liking  for  the  robbers  and  captains  of  banditti  of  his 
romances,  characters  who  could  not  be  prevented  from  usurp- 
ing the  place  of  the  heroes.  "  I  was  always  a  willing  listener 
to  tales  of  broil  and  battle  and  hubbub  of  every  kind,"  he  wrote 
in  later  life,  "  and  now  I  look  back  upon  it,  I  think  what  a 
godsend  I  must  have  been  while  a  boy  to  the  old  Trojans  of 
1745,  nay  1715,  who  used  to  frequent  my  father's  house,  and 
who  knew  as  little  as  I  did  for  what  market  I  was  laying  up 
the  raw  materials  of  their  oft-told  tales."4  What  attracted 
him  in  his  boyhood,  and  what  continued  to  attract  him,  was 
the  picturesque  incident,  the  color  of  the  past,  the  mere  look 

1  Ruskin's  remark  that  "  The  excellence  of  Scott's  work  is  precisely  in 
proportion  to  the  degree  in  which  it  is  sketched  from  present  nature," 
should  not  necessarily  lead  on  to  the  condemnation  which  follows  :  "  He  does 
not  see  how  anything  is  to  be  got  out  of  the  past  but  confusion,  old  iron 
on  drawing-room  chairs,  and  serious  inconvenience  to  Dr.  Heavysterne." 
{Modern  Painters,  Part  IV,  ch.  16,  §  32.) 

^Letters  to  Richard  Heber,  etc.   (by  J.  L.  Adolphus),  pp.   136-137. 

3  Mr.  Herford  distinguishes  two  lines  of  romantic  sentiment — "  the  one 
pursuing  the  image  of  the  past  as  a  refuge  from  reality,  the  other  as  a 
portion  of  it :  the  medievalism  of  Tieck  and  the  mediaevalism  of  Scott."s 
The  Age  of  Wordsworth,  Introduction,  p.  xxiv,  note. 

4  Letters  of  Lady  Louisa  Stuart,  p.  249. 


HIS   QUALIFICATIONS    AS    CRITIC  11 

of  its  varied  activity.  The  philosophy  of  history  was  grad- 
ually revealed  to  him,  however,  and  his  generalizing  faculty 
found  congenial  employment  in  tracing  out  the  relation  of  men 
to  movements,  of  national  impulses  to  world  history.  But 
however  much  he  might  exercise  his  analytical  powers,  history 
was  never  abstract  to  him,  nor  did  it  require  an  effort  for  him 
to  conjure  up  scenes  of  the  past.  An  acquaintance  with  the 
stores  of  early  literature  served  to  give  him  the  spirit  of  remote 
times  as  well  as  to  feed  his  literary  tastes.  On  this  side  he  had 
an  ample  equipment  for  critical  work,  conditioned,  of  course, 
by  the  other  qualities  of  his  mind,  which  determined  how  the 
equipment  should  be  used. 

That  Scott  was  not  a  dull  digger  in  heaps  of  ancient  lore 
was  owing  to  his  imaginative  power, — the  second  of  the  quali- 
ties which  we  have  distinguished  as  dominating  his  literary 
temperament.  "  I  can  see  as  many  castles  in  the  clouds  as  any 
man,"  he  testified.1  A  recent  writer  has  said  that  Scott  had 
more  than  any  other  man  that  ever  lived  a  sense  of  the  roman- 
tic, and  adds  that  his  was  that  true  romance  which  "  lies  not 
upon  the  outside  of  life,  but  absolutely  in  the  centre  of  it."2 
The  situations  and  the  very  objects  that  he  described  have  the 
power  of  stirring  the  romantic  spirit  in  his  readers  because  he 
was  alive  to  the  glamour  surrounding  anything  which  has  for 
generations  been  connected  with  human  thoughts  and  emotions. 
The  subjectivity  which  was  so  prominent  an  element  in  the 
romanticism  of  Shelley,  Keats,  and  Byron,  does  not  appear  in 
Scott's  work.  Nor  was  his  sense  of  the  mystery  of  things  so 
subtle  as  that  of  Coleridge.  But  Scott,  rather  than  Coleridge, 
was  the  interpreter  to  his  age  of  the  romantic  spirit,  for  the 
ordinary  person  likes  his  wonders  so  tangible  that  he  may  know 
definitely  the  point  at  which  they  impinge  upon  his  conscious- 
ness. In  Scott's  work  the  point  of  contact  is  made  clear:  the 
author  brings  his  atmosphere  not  from  another  world  but  from 
the  past,  and  with  all  its  strangeness  it  has  no  unearthly  quality. 

1  Journal,  Vol.  I,  p.  333;  Lockhart,  Vol.  V,  p.  81.  The  edition  of  Lock- 
hart's  Life  of  Scott  to  which  reference  is  made  throughout  this  study  is 
that  in  five  volumes,  published  by  Macmillan  &  Co.  in  the  "  Library  of 
English  Classics."  *  Chesterton,  Varied  Types,  pp.  161-2. 


12  SCOTT   AS   A   CRITIC   OF   LITERATURE 

In  general  the  romance  of  his  nature  is  rather  taken  for 
granted  than  insisted  on,  for  there  are  the  poems  and  the  novels 
to  bear  witness  to  that  side  of  his  temperament;  and  the  sur- 
prising thing  is  that  such  an  author  was  a  business  man,  a  large 
landowner,  an  industrious  lawyer.1 

Scott's  imaginative  sense,  which  clothed  in  fine  fancies  any 
incident  or  scene  presented,  however  nakedly,  to  his  view, 
accounts  in  part  for  his  notorious  tendency  to  overrate  the 
work  of  other  writers,  especially  those  who  wrote  stories  in  any 
form.  This  explanation  was  hinted  at  by  Sir  Walter  himself, 
and  formulated  by  Lockhart ;  it  seems  a  fairly  reasonable  way 
of  accounting  for  a  trait  that  at  first  appears  to  indicate  only 
a  foolish  excess  of  good-nature.  This  rich  and  active  imagina- 
tion, which  Scott  brought  to  bear  on  everything  he  read,  per- 
haps explains  also  his  habit  of  paying  little  attention  to  care- 
fully worked  out  details,  and  of  laying  almost  exclusive  em- 
phasis upon  main  outlines.  When  he  was  writing  his  Life  of 
Napoleon,  he  said  in  his  Journal:  "  Better  a  superficial  book 
which  brings  well  and  strikingly  together  the  known  and 
acknowledged  facts,  than  a  dull  boring  narrative,  pausing  to 
see  further  into  a  mill-stone  at  every  moment  than  the  nature 
of  the  mill-stone  admits."2  Probably  his  high  gift  of  imagi- 
nation made  him  a  little  impatient  with  the  remoter  reaches  of 
the  analytic  faculties.  Any  sustained  exercise  of  the  pure  rea- 
son was  outside  his  province,  reasonable  as  he  was  in  every- 
day affairs.  He  preferred  to  consider  facts,  and  to  theorize 
only  so  far  as  was  necessary  to  establish  comfortable  relations 
between  the  facts, — never  to  the  extent  of  trying  to  look  into 

1  The  fact  that  Scott  was  a  Clerk  of  the  Court  of  Sessions  is  remem- 
bered less  frequently  than  the  fact  that  he  had  business  complications. 
But  this  employment  of  his,  which  could  be  undertaken  only  by  a  lawyer, 
occupied  a  large  proportion  of  his  time  during  twenty-four  years.  He  once 
wrote,  "  I  cannot  work  well  after  I  have  had  four  or  five  hours  of  the 
court,  for  though  the  business  is  trifling,  yet  it  requires  constant  attention, 
which  is  at  length  exhausting."  (Constable's  Correspondence,  Vol.  Ill,  p. 
195.)  Again  he  wrote,  "  I  saw  it  reported  that  Joseph  Hume  said  I  com- 
posed novels  at  the  clerk's  table ;  but  Joseph  Hume  said  what  neither  was 
nor  could  be  correct,  as  any  one  who  either  knew  what  belonged  to  com- 
posing novels,  or  acting  as  clerk  to  a  court  of  justice,  would  easily  have 
discovered."      (Memoirs  of  Sir  William  Knighton,  p.   252.) 

2  Journal,  Vol.  I,  p.  60 ;  Lockhart,  Vol.  IV,  p.  390. 


HIS  QUALIFICATIONS   AS   CRITIC  L3 

the  center  of  a  mill-stone.  Jt  was  not  unusual  for  him  to  make 
very  acute  observations  in  the  spheres  of  ethics,  economics,  and 
psychology,  and  to  use  them  in  explaining  any  situation  which 
might  seem  to  require  their  assistance;  but  these  remarks  ware 
brief  and  incidental,  and  bore  a  very  definite  relation  to  the 
concrete  ideas  they  were  meant  to  illustrate. 

Scott  was  a  business  man  as  well  as  an  antiquary  and  a  poet. 
Mr.  Palgrave  thought  Lockhart  went  too  far  in  creating  the 
impression  that  Scott  could  detach  his  mind  from  the  world 
of  imagination  and  apply  its  full  force  to  practical  affairs.1 
Yet  the  oversight  of  lands  and  accounts  and  of  all  ordinary 
matters  was  so  congenial  to  him,  and  his  practical  activities 
were  on  the  whole  conducted  with  so  much  spirit  and  capa- 
bility, that  after  emphasizing  his  preoccupation  with  the  poetic 
aspects  of  the  life  of  his  ancestors,  we  must  turn  immediately 
about  and  lay  stress  upon  his  keen  judgment  in  everyday 
affairs.  To  a  school-boy  poet  he  once  wrote :  "  I  would  .  .  . 
caution  you  against  an  enthusiasm  which,  while  it  argues  an 
excellent  disposition  and  a  feeling  heart,  requires  to  be  watched 
and  restrained,  though  not  repressed.  It  is  apt,  if  too  much 
indulged,  to  engender  a  fastidious  contempt  for  the  ordinary 
business  of  the  world,  and  gradually  to  render  us  unfit  for  the 
exercise  of  the  useful  and  domestic  virtues  which  depend 
greatly  upon  our  not  exalting  our  feelings  above  the  temper 
of  well-ordered  and  well-educated  society."2  He  phrased  the 
same  matter  differently  when  he  said :  " '  I'd  rather  be  a  kitten 
and  cry,  Mew ! '  than  write  the  best  poetry  in  the  world  on 
condition  of  laying  aside  common-sense  in  the  ordinary  trans- 
actions and  business  of  the  world."3  "  He  thought,"  said 
Lockhart,  "  that  to  spend  some  fair  portion  of  every  day  in  any 
matter-of-fact  occupation  is  good  for  the  higher  faculties  them- 
selves in  the  upshot."4  Whether  or  not  we  consider  this  the 
ideal  theory  of  life  for  a  poet,  we  find  it  reasonable  to  suppose 
that  a  critic  will  be  the  better  critic  if  he  preserve  some  balance 
between   matter-of-fact   occupation   and   the    exercise   of   his 

1  See  the  Memoir  prefixed  to  the  Globe  Edition  of  Scott's  poems. 

2  Familiar  Letters,  Vol.  I,  p.  217. 

3  Lockhart,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  447-  *  Ibid.,  Vol.  I,  p.   122. 


14  SCOTT   AS   A   CRITIC   OF   LITERATURE 

higher  faculties.  Sir  Walter's  maxim  applies  well  to  himself 
at  least,  and  an  analysis  of  his  powers  as  a  critic  derives  some 
light  from  it. 

The  thing  that  is  waiting  to  be  said  is  of  course  that  his 
criticism  is  distinguished  by  common-sense.  Whether  common- 
sense  should  really  predominate  in  criticism  might  perhaps  be 
debated;  the  quality  indicates,  indeed,  not  only  the  excellence 
but  also  the  limitations  of  his  method.  For  example,  Scott  was 
rather  too  much  given  to  accepting  popular  favor  as  the  test 
of  merit  in  literary  work,  and  though  the  clamorously  eager 
reception  of  his  own  books  was  never  able  to  raise  his  self- 
esteem  to  a  very  high  pitch,  it  seems  to  have  been  the  only 
thing  that  induced  him  to  respect  his  powers  in  anything  like 
an  appreciative  way.1  His  instinct  and  his  judgment  agreed 
in  urging  him  to  avoid  being  a  man  of  "  mere  theory,"2  and 
he  sought  always  to  test  opinions  by  practical  standards. 

More  or  less  connected  with  his  good  sense  are  other  quali- 
ties which  also  had  their  effect  upon  his  critical  work, — his 
cheerfulness,  his  sweet  temper  and  human  sympathy,  his  mod- 
esty, his  humor,  his  independence  of  spirit,  and  his  enthusiastic 
delight  in  literature.  That  his  cheerfulness  was  a  matter  of 
temperament  we  cannot  doubt,  but  it  was  also  founded  on  prin- 
ciple. He  had  remarkable  power  of  self-control.3  His  opin- 
ion that  it  is  a  man's  duty  to  live  a  happy  life  appears  rather 
quaintly  in  the  sermonizing  with  which  he  felt  called  upon  to 
temper  the  admiration  expressed  in  his  articles  on  Childe 
Harold,  and  it  is  implicit  in  many  of  his  biographical  studies. 
His  own  amiability  of  course  influenced  all  his  work.  Satire 
he  considered  objectionable,  "  a  woman's  fault,"4  as  he  once 
called  it ;  though  he  did  not  feel  himself  "  altogether  disquali- 

1  Cooper  measured  his  own  success  by  the  same  test.  At  the  conclusion 
of  the  Letter  to  the  Publisher  with  which  The  Pioneers  originally  opened 
he  said  he  should  look  to  his  publisher  for  "  the  only  true  account  of  the 
reception  of  his  book."     (Lounsbury's  Life  of  Cooper,  pp.  43-4.) 

2  Napoleon,  Vol.  I,  ch.  2. 

3  "  He  fixed  his  attention  on  his  employments  without  the  slightest  con- 
sideration for  his  own  feelings  of  whatever  kind,  either  in  regard  to  state 
of  health  or  domestic  sorrows."  (Memoirs  of  a  Literary  Veteran,  by  R.  P. 
Gillies,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  141.)  i  Familiar  Letters,  Vol.  II,  p.  365. 


HIS    QUALIFICATIONS   AS    CRITIC  1  •"> 

lied  for  it  by  nature."1  "  I  have  refrained,  as  much  as  human 
frailty  will  permit,  from  all  satirical  composition,"2  he  said. 
For  satire  he  seems  to  have  substituted  that  kind  of  "  serious 
banter,  a  style  hovering  between  affected  gravity  and  satirical 
slyness,"  which  has  been  pointed  out  as  characteristic  of  him.3 
Washington  Irving  noticed  a  similar  tone  in  all  his  familiar 
conversations  about  local  traditions  and  superstitions.4 

He  was  really  optimistic,  except  on  some  political  questions. 
In  his  Lives  of  the  Novelists  he  shows  that  he  thought  man- 
ners and  morals  had  improved  in  the  previous  hundred  years; 
and  none  of  his  reviews  exhibits  the  feeling  so  common  among 
men  of  letters  in  all  ages,  that  their  own  times  are  intellectually 
degenerate.  It  is  true  that  he  looked  back  to  the  days  of  Blair, 
Hume,  Adam  Smith,  Robertson,  and  Ferguson,  as  the  "  golden 
days  of  Edinburgh,"5  but  those  golden  days  were  no  farther 
away  than  his  own  boyhood,  and  he  had  felt  the  exhilaration 
of  the  stimulating  society  which  he  praised.  One  of  his  con- 
temporaries spoke  of  Scott's  own  works  as  throwing  "  a  literary 
splendour  over  his  native  city  "  ;6  and  George  Ticknor  said  of 
him,  "  He  is  indeed  the  lord  of  the  ascendant  now  in  Edin- 
burgh, and  wrell  deserves  to  be,  for  I  look  upon  him  to  be  quite 
as  remarkable  in  intercourse  and  conversation,  as  he  is  in  any 
of  his  writings,  even  in  his  novels."7  But  he  could  hardly  be 
expected  to  perceive  the  luster  surrounding  his  own  person- 
ality, and  this  one  instance  of  regret  for  former  days  counts 
little  against  the  abundant  evidence  that  he  thought  the  world 
was  improving.  Yet  of  all  his  contemporaries  he  was  probably 
the  one  who  looked  back  at  the  past  with  the  greatest  interest. 
The  impression  made  by  the  author  of  Watverley  upon  the  mind 
of  a  young  enthusiast  of  his  own  time  is  too  delightful  to  pass 
over  without  quotation.  "  He  has  no  eccentric  sympathies  or 
antipathies  " ;  wrote  J.  L.  Adolphus,  "  no  maudlin  philanthropy 
or  impertinent  cynicism  ;  no  nondescript  hobby-horse ;  and  with 

1  Familiar  Letters,   Vol.    I,   p.    112. 

2  Journal,  Vol.  I,  p.  303  ;  Lockhart,  Vol.  V,  p.  68. 

3  Letters  to  Heber,  p.  69.  4  Irving's  Abbotsford. 

5  Life,  Letters,  and  Journals  of  George  Ticknor,  Vol.  I,  p.  282.     See  also 
Scott's  review  of  the  Life  of  Home;  and  Lockhart,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  304. 
6Cockburn's  Memorials,  p.  181.  ''Ticknor,  Vol.  I,  p.  280. 


16  SCOTT   AS   A    CRITIC    OF   LITERATURE 

all  his  matchless  energy  and  originality  of  mind,  he  is  content 
to  admire  popular  books,  and  enjoy  popular  pleasures ;  to 
cherish  those  opinions  which  experience  has  sanctioned ;  to  rev- 
erence those  institutions  which  antiquity  has  hallowed ;  and  to 
enjoy,  admire,  cherish,  and  reverence  all  these  with  the  same 
plainness,  simplicity,  and  sincerity  as  our  ancestors  did  of  old."1 
By  temperament,  then,  Scott  was  enthusiastic  over  the  past 
and  cheerful  in  regard  to  his  own  day ;  he  was  imaginative, 
practical,  genial ;  and  these  traits  must  be  taken  into  account 
in  judging  his  critical  writings.  These  and  other  qualities 
may  be  deduced  from  the  most  superficial  study  of  his  creative 
work.  The  mere  bulk  of  that  work  bears  witness  to  two 
things :  first  that  Scott  was  primarily  a  creative  writer ;  again, 
that  he  was  of  those  who  write  much  rather  than  minutely. 
It  is  obvious  that  to  attack  details  would  be  easy.  And  since 
he  was  only  secondarily  a  critic,  it  is  natural  that  his  critical 
opinions  should  not  have  been  erected  into  any  system.  But 
while  they  are  essentially  desultory,  they  are  the  ideas  of  a 
man  whose  information  and  enthusiasm  extended  through  a 
wide  range  of  studies ;  and  they  are  rendered  impressive  by  the 
abundance,  variety,  and  energy,  which  mark  them  as  charac- 
teristic of  Scott. 

1  Letters  to  Heber,  p.  63  ;  Lockhart,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  496. 


CHAPTER   III 

Scott's  Work  as  Student  and  Editor  in  the  Field  of 
Literary  History 

the  mediaeval  period 

Minstrelsy  of  the  Scottish  Border 

Scott's  early  interest  in  ballads  —  Casual  origin  of  the  Minstrelsy  — 
Importance  of  the  book  in  Scott's  career  —  Plan  of  the  book — Medi- 
aeval scholarship  of  Scott's  time  —  His  theory  as  to  the  origin  of 
ballads  and  their  deterioration  —  His  attitude  toward  the  work  of  pre- 
vious editors  —  His  method  of  forming  texts  —  Kinds  of  changes  he 
made  —  His  qualifications  for  emending  old  poetry  —  Modern  imitations 
of  the  ballad  included  in  the  Minstrelsy — Remarks  on  the  ballad  style 

—  Impossibility  of  a  scientific  treatment  of  folk-poetry  in  Scott's  time 

—  Real  importance  of  the  Minstrelsy. 

We  think  of  the  Border  Minstrelsy  as  the  first  work  which 
resulted  from  the  preparation  of  Scott's  whole  youth,  between 
the  days  when  he  insisted  on  shouting  the  lines  of  Hardyknute 
into  the  ears  of  the  irate  clergyman  making  a  parish  call,  and 
the  time  when  he  and  his  equally  ardent  friends  gathered  their 
ballads  from  the  lips  of  old  women  among  the  hills.  But  we 
have  seen  that  the  inspiration  for  his  first  attempts  at  writing 
poetry  came  only  indirectly  from  the  ballads  of  his  own  coun- 
try. We  learn  from  the  introduction  to  the  third  part  of  the 
Minstrelsy  that  some  of  the  young  men  of  Scott's  circle  in 
Edinburgh  were  stimulated  by  what  the  novelist,  Henry  Mac- 
kenzie, told  them  of  the  beauties  of  German  literature,  to  form 
a  class  for  the  study  of  that  language.  This  was  when  Scott 
was  twenty-one,  but  it  was  still  four  years  before  he  found  him- 
self writing  those  translations  which  mark  the  sufficiently 
modest  beginning  of  his  literary  career.  His  enthusiasm  for 
German  literature  was  not  at  first  tempered  by  any  critical  dis- 
crimination, if  we  may  judge  from  the  opinions  of  one  or  two 
2  17 


18  SCOTT  AS  A  CRITIC  OF  LITERATURE 

of  his  friends  who  labored  to  point  out  to  him  the  extravagance 
and  false  sentiment  which  he  was  too  ready  to  admire  along 
with  the  real  genius  of  some  of  his  models.1.  Apparently  their 
efforts  were  useful,  for  in  a  review  written  in  1806  we  find 
Scott,  in  a  remark  on  Burger,  referring  to  "  the  taste  for  out- 
rageous sensibility,  which  disgraces  most  German  poetry."2 
His  special  interest  in  the  Germans  was  an  early  mood  which 
seems  not  to  have  returned.  After  the  process  of  translation 
had  discovered  to  him  his  verse-making  faculty,  he  naturally 
passed  on  to  the  writing  of  original  poems,  and  circumstances 
of  a  half  accidental  sort  determined  that  the  Scottish  ballads 
which  he  had  always  loved  should  absorb  his  attention  for  the 
next  two  or  three  years. 

The  publication  of  a  book  of  ballads  was  first  suggested  by 
Scott  as  an  opportunity  for  his  friend  Ballantyne  to  exhibit  his 
skill  as  a  printer  and  so  increase  his  business.  "  I  have  been 
for  years  collecting  old  Border  ballads,"  Scott  remarked,  "  and 
I  think  I  could  with  little  trouble  put  together  such  a  selection 
from  them  as  might  make  a  neat  little  volume  to  sell  for  four 
or  five  shillings." 3  From  this  casual  proposition  resulted 
The  Minstrelsy  of  the  Scottish  Border,  published  in  three  vol- 
umes in  1802-3  and  often  revised  and  reissued  during  the 
editor's  lifetime. 

This  book  and  the  prefaces  to  his  own  novels  are  likely 
to  be  thought  of  first  when  Scott  is  spoken  of  as  a  critic. 
The  connection  between  the  Minstrelsy  and  the  novels  has  often 
been  pointed  out,  ever  since  the  day  of  the  contemporary  who, 
on  reading  the  ballads  with  their  introductions,  exclaimed  that 
in  that  book  were  the  elements  of  a  hundred  historical  ro- 
mances.4 The  interest  of  the  earlier  work  is  undoubtedly  mul- 
tiplied by  the  associations  in  the  light  of  which  we  read  it — 
associations  connected  with  the  editor's  whole  experience  as  an 
author,  from  the  Lay  of  the  Last  Minstrel  to  Castle  Dangerous. 

Important  as  the  Minstrelsy  is  from  the  point  of  view  of 
literary  criticism,  the  material  of  its  introductions  is  chiefly 

1  Lockhart,  Vol.  I,  p.  177. 

2  Review  of  Poems  of  William  Herbert,  Edinburgh  Rcviezv,  October, 
1806. 

3  Lockhart,  Vol.  I,  pp.  275-6.  4  Lockhart,  Vol.  I,  p.  333. 


MINSTRELSY    OF    Till:    SCOTTISH     IiOUDKR  1  <J 

historical.  The  introduction  in  the  original  edition  gives  an 
account  of  life  on  the  Border  in  the  fifteenth  and  sixteenth 
centuries,  with  the  outlines  of  many  of  the  events  that  stimu- 
lated ballad-making,  and  an  analysis  of  the  temper  of  the 
Marchmen  among  whom  this  kind  of  poetry  flourished;  then 
by  special  introductions  and  notes  to  the  poems  an  attempt  is 
made  to  explain  both  the  incidents  on  which  they  seem  to  have 
been  founded,  and  parallel  cases  that  appear  in  tradition  or 
record.  Some  enthusiastic  comment  is  included,  of  the  kind 
that  was  so  natural  to  Scott,  on  the  effect  of  ballad  poetry  upon 
a  spirited  and  warlike  people.  The  writer  continues :  "  But  it 
is  not  the  Editor's  present  intention  to  enter  upon  a  history  of 
Border  poetry;  a  subject  of  great  difficulty,  and  which  the  ex- 
tent of  his  information  does  not  as  yet  permit  him  to  engage 
in."  It  was,  in  fact,  nearly  thirty  years  later1  that  Scott  wrote 
the  Remarks  on  Popular  Poetry  which  since  that  date  have 
formed  an  introduction  to  the  book,  as  well  as  the  essay,  On 
Imitations  of  the  Ancient  Ballad,  which  at  present  precedes  the 
third  part.  The  more  purely  literary  side  of  the  editor's  duty 
— leaving  out  of  account  the  modern  poems  written  by  Scott 
and  others — was  exhibited  chiefly  in  the  construction  of  texts, 
a  matter  of  which  I  shall  speak  later,  after  considering  his 
views  of  the  origin  and  character  of  folk-poetry  in  general. 

But  first  we  may  recall  the  fact  that  Scott  was  following 
a  fairly  wrell  established  vogue  in  giving  scholarly  attention  to 
ancient  popular  poetry.  A  revival  of  interest  in  the  study  of 
mediaeval  literature  had  been  stimulated  in  England  by  the 
publication  of  Percy's  Rcliqnes  in  1765  and  Warton's  History 
of  English  Poetry  in  1774.  In  1800  there  were  enough  well- 
known  antiquaries  to  keep  Scott  from  being  in  any  sense 
lonely.  Among  them  Joseph  Ritson2  was  the  most  learned,  but 
he  was  crotchety  in  the  extreme;  and  while  his  notions  as  to 

1  In   1830. 

2  Ritson's  principal  works  were  as  follows :  Select  Collection  of  English 
Songs  (1783)  ;  Pieces  of  Ancient  Popular  Poetry  from  Authentic  Manu- 
scripts and  Old  Printed  Copies  (1791)  ;  Ancient  Songs  from  the  Time  of 
Henry  III.  to  the  Revolution  (1792)  ;  Scottish  Songs  with  the  Genuine 
Music  (1794)  ;  Poems  by  Laurence  Minot  (1795)  ;  Robin  Hood  Poems 
(1795)  ;   Ancient  English  Metrical  Romances    (1802). 


20  SCOTT   AS   A   CRITIC   OF   LITERATURE 

research  were  in  advance  of  his  time,  his  controversial  style 
resembled  that  of  the  seventeenth  century.  George  Ellis,1  on 
the  other  hand,  was  distinguished  by  an  eighteenth-century 
urbanity,  and  his  combination  of  learning  and  good  taste  fitted 
him  to  influence  a  broader  public  than  that  of  specialists.  At 
the  same  time  he  was  a  delightful  and  stimulating  friend  to 
other  scholars.  Southey  was  becoming  known  as  an  authority 
on  the  history  and  literature  of  the  Spanish  peninsula.  A 
review  in  the  Quarterly  a  dozen  years  later  mentions  these 
three, — Ellis,  Scott,  and  Southey, — as  "  good  men  and  true  " 
to  serve  as  guides  in  the  remote  realms  of  literature.2  Ellis's 
friend,  John  Hookham  Frere,  had  great  abilities  but  was  an 
incurable  dillettante.  Scott  particularly  admired  a  Middle- 
English  version  of  The  Battle  of  Brunanburgh  which 
Frere  wrote  in  his  school-boy  days,  and  considered  him  an 
authoritative  critic  of  mediaeval  English  poetry.  Robert  Sur- 
tees3  and  Francis  Douce4  were  antiquaries  of  some  importance, 
and  both,  like  all  the  others  named,  were  friends  of  Scott.  Mr. 
Herford  calls  this  period  a  day  of  "  Specimens  "  and  extracts : 
"  Mediaeval  romance  was  studied  in  Ellis's  Specimens"  he 
says,  "  the  Elizabethan  drama  in  Lamb's,  literary  history  at 
large  in  D'Israeli's  gently  garrulous  compilations  of  its  '  quar- 
rels,' '  amenities,'  '  calamities,'  and  '  curiosities.'  "5  But  the 
scholarship  of  the  time  on  the  whole  is  worthy  of  respect.  In 
the  case  of  ballads  and  romances  notable  work  had  been  done 
before  Scott  entered  the  field,6  and  he  and  his  contemporaries 

1  Ellis  published  his  Specimens  of  the  Early  English  Poets  in  1790,  and 
it  was  reissued  with  the  addition  of  the  Introduction  in  1801  and  1803. 
He  edited  also  Way's  translations  of  the  Fabliaux  (1796),  and  Specimens 
of  Early  English  Romances  in  Metre   (1805). 

2  Review  of  Dunlop's  History  of  Fiction,  July,  181 5. 

3The  Magnum  Opus  of  Robert  Surtees  was  his  History  of  Durham,  pub- 
lished 1816-1840. 

4  Douce  published  Illustrations  of  Shakespeare  in  1807.  Later  he  edited 
Arnold's  Chronicle ;  Judicium,  a  Pageant ;  and  a  metrical  Life  of  St.  Robert. 
The  two  latter,  which  appeared  in  1822  and  1824,  were  done  for  the  Rox- 
burghe  Club.  In  1824  he  also  wrote  some  notes  for  Warton's  History  of 
English  Poetry. 

5  Age  of  Wordsworth,  p.  39. 

0  A  number  of  volumes  containing  old  ballads  together  with  modern 
imitations  had  been  published  both  before  and  after  the  appearance  of 
Percy's  Reliques,  but  Ritson's  collections  were  the  first,  except  Percy's,  to 
treat  the  material  in  a  scholarly  way. 


MINSTRELSY   OF   THE    SCOTTISH    BORDER  21 

were  carrying  out  the  promise  of  the  half  century  before  them 
— continuing  the  work  that  Percy  and  Warton  had  begun. 

Among  the  problems  connected  with  ballad  study, that  which 
arises  first  is  naturally  the  question  of  origins.  Scott  made  no 
attempt  to  formulate  a  theory  different  in  any  main  element 
from  that  which  was  held  by  his  predecessors.  He  agreed 
with  Percy  that  ballads  were  composed  and  sung  by  minstrels, 
and  based  his  discussion  on  the  materials  brought  forward  by 
Percy  and  Ritson  for  use  in  their  great  controversy.1  Ritson 
himself  never  doubted  that  ballads  were  composed  and  sung 
by  individual  authors,  though  he  might  refuse  to  call  them 
minstrels.  The  idea  of  communal  authorship,  which  Jacob 
Grimm  was  to  suggest  only  half  a  dozen  years  after  the  first 
edition  of  the  Minstrelsy,  would  doubtless  have  been  rejected 
by  Scott,  even  if  he  had  considered  it.  But  we  have  no  evi- 
dence that  he  did  so.  Probably  he  did  not,  as  he  never  felt 
the  need  of  a  new  theory.2 

1  The  discussion  centered  upon  the  social  and  literary  position  of  min- 
strels. The  first  edition  of  the  Reliques  of  Ancient  English  Poetry,  pub- 
lished in  1765,  contained  an  essay  on  the  History  of  Minstrelsy,  and  one 
on  the  Origin  of  the  Metrical  Romances,  which,  taken  together,  says  Mr. 
Courthope,  "  may  be  said  to  furnish  the  first  generalized  theory  of  the  nature 
of  mediaeval  poetry."  (History  of  English  Poetry,  Vol.  I,  p.  426.)  Percy 
considered  the  minstrels  as  the  authors  of  the  compositions  which  they  sang 
to  the  harp,  and  as  holding  a  dignified  social  position  similar  to  that  of  the 
Anglo-Saxon  scop  or  the  old  Norse  scald.  This  theory  was  vigorously 
attacked  by  Joseph  Ritson  in  the  preface  of  his  Select  Collection  of  English 
Songs  in  1783,  and  again  in  his  Ancient  English  Metrical  Romances  in 
1802,  and  in  his  essay  On  the  Ancient  English  Minstrels  in  Ancient  Songs 
and  Ballads  (1702).  Ritson  contended  that  minstrels  were  musical  per- 
formers of  a  low  class,  or  even  acrobats,  and  that  they  were  not  literary 
composers.  Scott  used  his  knowledge  of  ballads  and  romances  and  the 
customs  depicted  in  them  to  reinforce  his  own  decision  that  the  truth  lay 
somewhere  between  the  two  extremes.  He  pointed  out  that  the  word  may 
have  covered  a  wide  variety  of  professional  entertainers.  A  modern  com- 
ment (by  E.  K.  Chambers,  in  The  Mediaeval  Stage,  Vol.  I,  p.  66)  seems 
like  an  echo  of  Scott :  "  This  general  antithesis  between  the  higher  and 
lower  minstrelsy  may  now.  perhaps,  be  regarded  as  established.  It  was 
the  neglect  of  it,  surely,  that  led  to  that  curious  and  barren  logomachy 
between  Percy  and  Ritson,  in  which  neither  of  the  disputants  can  be  said 
to  have  had  hold  of  more  than  a  bare  half  of  the  truth." 

2  Scott's  theory  as  to  the  authorship  of  ballads  is  even  now  held  by  Mr. 
Courthope.  At  the  end  of  his  chapter  on  Minstrelsy,  in  The  History  of 
English  Poetry,  he  thus  sums  up  the  matter :   "  All  the  evidence  cited  in 


22  SCOTT   AS    A   CRITIC   OF   LITERATURE 

Scott's  opinion  in  regard  to  the  transmission  of  ballads  fol- 
lowed naturally  from  his  theory  of  their  origin.  His  aristo- 
cratic instincts  perhaps  helped  to  determine  his  belief  that 
ballads  were  composed  by  gifted  minstrels,  and  that  they 
had  deteriorated  in  the  process  of  being  handed  down  by  reci- 
tation. He  called  tradition  "  a  sort  of  perverted  alchymy  which 
converts  gold  into  lead."  "  All  that  is  abstractedly  poetical," 
he  said,  "  all  that  is  above  the  comprehension  of  the  merest 
peasant,  is  apt  to  escape  in  frequent  repetition ;  and  the  lacunae 
thus  created  are  filled  up  either  by  lines  from  other  ditties  or 
from  the  mother  wit  of  the  reciter  or  singer.  The  injury,  in 
either  case,  is  obvious  and  irreparable."1  From  this  point  of 
view  Scott  considered  that  the  ballads  were  only  getting  their 
rights  when  a  skilful  hand  gave  them  such  a  retouching  as 
should  enable  them  to  appear  in  something  of  what  he  called 
their  original  vigor.2 

We  may  learn  what  qualities  he  considered  necessary  for  an 
editor  in  this  field,  from  the  latter  part  of  his  Remarks  on 
Popular  Poetry,  in  which  he  discusses  previous  attempts  to  col- 
lect English  and  Scottish  ballads.  Of  Percy  he  speaks  in  the 
highest  terms,  here  and  elsewhere.     We  have  seen  that  he  felt 

this  chapter  shows  that,  so  far  from  the  ballad  being  a  spontaneous  product 
of  popular  imagination,  it  was  a  type  of  poem  adapted  by  the  professors 
of  the  declining  art  of  minstrelsy,  from  the  romances  once  in  favour  with 
the  educated  classes.  Everything  in  the  ballad — matter,  form,  composition 
— is  the  work  of  the  minstrel ;  all  that  the  people  do  is  to  remember  and 
repeat  what  the  minstrel  has  put  together."  This  statement  represents  a 
position  which  is  actively  assailed  by  the  adherents  of  the  communal  origin 
theory.  Another  critical  idea  which  originated  in  Germany,  and  in  which 
Scott  had  no  interest,  though  he  knew  something  about  it,  was  the  Wolf- 
fian hypothesis  in  regard  to  the  Homeric  poems.  He  once  heard  Coleridge 
expound  the  subject,  but  failed  to  join  in  the  discussion.  (Journal,  Vol. 
II,  p.  164;  Lockhart,  Vol.  V,  p.  193.)  He  said  the  theory  could  never  be 
held  by  any  poet.  See  a  note  by  Lockhart  on  the  essay  on  Popular  Poetry. 
Henderson's  edition  of  Minstrelsy,  Vol.  I,  p.  3. 

1  Review  of  Cromek's  Reliques  of  Burns.  Quarterly  Review,  February, 
1809. 

2 "  No  one  but  Burns  ever  succeeded  in  patching  up  old  Scottish  songs 
with  any  good  effect,"  Scott  wrote  in  his  Journal  (Vol.  II,  p.  25).  And 
in  his  review  of  Cromek's  Reliques  of  Burns  he  said  on  the  same  subject 
of  Scottish  songs :  "  Few,  whether  serious  or  humorous,  past  through  his 
hands  without  receiving  some  of  those  magic  touches  which,  without  greatly 
altering  the  song,  restored  its  original  spirit,  or  gave  it  more  than  it  had 
ever  possessed."      (Quarterly,  February,   1809.) 


MINSTRELSY   OF   THE   SCOTTISH    BORDER  23 

a  strong  sympathy  with  Percy's  desire  to  dress  up  the  ballads 
and  make  them  as  attractive  to  the  public  as  their  intrinsic 
charms  render  them  to  their  friends.  He  did  not  of  course 
realize  the  extent  to  which  the  Bishop  reworked  his  materials, 
as  the  publication  of  the  folio  manuscript  has  since  revealed  it, 
and  Ritson's  captious  remarks  on  the  subject  were  naturally 
discounted  on  the  score  of  their  ill-temper.  But  it  is  not  to  be 
doubted  that  Ritson  had  an  appreciable  effect  on  Scott's  atti- 
tude, by  stirring  him  up  to  some  comprehension  of  the  things 
that  might  be  said  in  favor  even  of  dull  accuracy.  Ritson's 
collections  are  cited  in  their  place,  with  a  tribute  to  the  extreme 
fidelity  of  their  editor.  It  is  a  pity  that  this  accurate  scholar 
could  not  have  had  a  sufficient  amount  of  literary  taste,  to  say 
nothing  of  good  manners,  to  inspire  others  with  a  fuller  trust 
in  his  method.  Scott  expresses  impatience  with  him  for  seem- 
ing to  prefer  the  less  effective  text  in  many  instances,  "  as  if  a 
poem  was  not  more  likely  to  be  deteriorated  than  improved  by 
passing  through  the  mouths  of  many  reciters."1  He  admitted, 
however,  that  it  was  not  in  his  own  period  necessary  to  rework 
the  ballads  as  much  as  Bishop  Percy  had  done,  since  the 
Reliqucs  had  already  created  an  audience  for  popular  poetry. 
His  purpose  evidently  was  to  steer  a  middle  course  between 
such  graceful  but  sophisticated  versions  as  were  given  in  the 
Reliques,  and  the  exact  transcript  of  everything  to  be  gathered 
from  tradition,  whether  interesting  or  not,  that  was  attempted 
by  Ritson.  In  his  later  revisions  he  gave  way  more  than  at 
first  to  his  natural  impulse  in  favor  of  the  added  graces  which 
he  could  supply.2 

It  is  easy  to  see  how  his  own  contributions  of  word  and 
phrase  might  slip  in,  since  his  avowed  method  was  to  collate 
the  different  texts  secured  from  manuscripts  or  recitation  or 
both,  and  so  to  give  what  to  his  mind  was  the  worthiest  ver- 
sion. Believing  that  the  ballads  had  been  composed  by  men  not 
unlike  himself,  he  assumed,  in  the  manner  well  known  to  clas- 
sical text-critics,  that  his  familiarity  with  the  conditions  of  the 

1  Remarks  on  Popular  Poetry,  Henderson's  edition  of  Minstrelsy,  Vol.  I, 
p.  46. 

2  Henderson's  edition  of  Minstrelsy,  Vol.  I,  p.  xix. 


24  SCOTT   AS   A   CRITIC   OF   LITERATURE 

ancient  social  order  gave  him  some  license  for  changing  here 
and  there  a  word  or  a  line.  In  determining  which  stanzas  or 
lines  to  choose,  when  choice  was  possible,  he  was  guided  by 
his  antiquarian  knowledge  and  by  the  general  principle  of 
selecting  the  most  poetic  rendering  among  those  at  his  com- 
mand. This  was  his  way  of  showing  his  respect  for  the  min- 
strel bards  of  whom  he  was  fond  of  considering  himself  a 
successor. 

So  far  it  is  perfectly  easy  to  take  his  point  of  view.  But  it 
is  more  difficult  to  reconcile  his  practice  with  his  professions. 
We  find  this  declaration  in  the  forefront  of  the  book :  "  No 
liberties  have  been  taken  either  with  the  recited  or  written 
copies  of  these  ballads,  farther  than  that,  where  they  disagreed, 
which  is  by  no  means  unusual,  the  editor,  in  justice  to  the 
author,  has  uniformly  preserved  what  seemed  to' him  the  best 
or  most  poetical  rendering  of  the  passage.  .  .  .  Some  arrange- 
ment was  also  occasionally  necessary  to  recover  the  rhyme, 
which  was  often,  by  the  ignorance  of  the  reciters,  transposed 
or  thrown  into  the  middle  of  the  line.  With  these  freedoms, 
which  were  essentially  necessary  to  remove  obvious  corruptions 
and  fit  the  ballads  for  the  press,  the  editor  presents  them  to  the 
public,  under  the  complete  assurance  that  they  carry  with  them 
the  most  indisputable  marks  of  their  authenticity."1  In  the 
face  of  this  fair  announcement  we  are  surprised,  to  say  the 
least,  at  the  number  of  lines  and  stanzas  which  scholars  have 
discovered  to  be  of  Scott's  own  composition.2 

1  Henderson's  edition  of  Minstrelsy,  Vol.  I,  pp.  167-8. 

2  The  matter  may  be  traced  in  Child's  collection  of  ballads,  or  more 
easily  in  the  latest  edition  of  the  Minstrelsy,  edited  by  T.  F.  Henderson 
and  published  in  four  volumes  in  1902.  Mr.  Henderson's  views  of  ballad 
origins  are  quite  in  accord  with  Scott's  own,  but  he  notes  the  points  at 
which  Scott  failed  to  follow  any  originals.  There  seems  to  be  some  reason 
to  believe,  however,  though  Mr.  Henderson  does  not  say  so,  that  Scott  wrote 
Kinmont  Willie  without  any  originals  at  all,  except  the  very  similar  situa- 
tions in  three  or  four  other  ballads.  See  the  introduction  by  Professor 
Kittredge  to  the  abridged  edition  of  Child's  ballads,  edited  by  himself  and 
Helen  Child  Sargent. 

It  is  unnecessary  to  give  here  any  detailed  account  of  Scott's  procedure, 
as  the  matter  has  been  thoroughly  worked  out  by  students  of  ballads.  A 
few  examples  may  be  given  as  illustrations,  however.  In  The  Dozvie  Dens 
of  Yarrow   (Henderson's  edition,  Vol.  Ill,  p.   173)    28  lines  out  of  the  68 


MINSTRELSY    OF   THE    SCOTTISH    BORDER  Zb 

Occasionally  his  notes  give  some  slight  indication  of  his 
method  of  treatment,  as  for  instance  this,  on  The  Doivic  Dens 
of  Yarrow:  "  The  editor  found  it  easy  to  collect  a  variety  of 
copies;  but  very  difficult  indeed  to  select  from  them  such  a  col- 
lated edition  as  might  in  any  degree  suit  the  taste  of  'these 
more  light  and  giddy-paced  times.'"  Notes  on  some  others 
of  the  ballads  say  that  "a  few  conjectural  emendations  have 
been  found  necessary,"  but  no  one  of  these  remarks  would 
seem  really  ingenuous  in  a  modern  scholar  when  we  consider 
how  far  the  "  conjectural  emendations  "  extended.  Moreover, 
changes  were  often  made  without  the  slightest  clue  in  intro- 
duction or  note.1 

The  case  was  complicated  for  Scott  by  the  poetical  tastes  of 
his  assistants.     Leyden2  was  apparently  quite  capable  of  taking 

are  noted  by  Mr.  Henderson  as  either  changed  or  added  by  Scott.  Scott 
writes  (beginning  of  fifth  stanza),  "As  he  gaed  up  the  Tennies  bank"  for 
"  As  he  gaed  up  yon  high,  high  hill,"  and  we  find  from  a  note  of  Lockhart's 
that  The  Tennies  is  the  name  of  a  farm  belonging  to  the  Duke  of  Buc- 
cleuch.     In  the  sixth  stanza  Scott  changes  the   lines, 

"  O  ir  ye  come  to  drink  the  wine 
As  we  hae  done  before,   O  ?  "  to 

"  O  come  ye  here  to  part  your  land, 
The  bonnie  forest  thorough  ?  " 
In  the  seventeenth  stanza  he  changes, 

"  A  better  rose  will  never  spring 
Than    him    I've   lost    on    Yarrow?"    to 

"  A  fairer  rose  did  never  bloom 
Than  now  lies  cropp'd  on  Yarrow." 
In  Jellon  Grame  (Vol.  Ill,  p.  203),  Mr.  Henderson  notes  changes  in  15 
different  lines,  and  points  out  2  whole  stanzas,  out  of  the  21,  that  are 
interpolated.  In  the  Gay  Goss-hawk  (Vol.  Ill,  p.  187)  6  stanzas  out  of 
39  are  noted  as  probably  wholly  or  mainly  by  Scott,  and  30  stanzas  were 
changed  by  him.  Sometimes  his  alterations  occurred  in  every  line  of  a 
stanza.  It  is  probable  that  Scott  changed  Jamie  Telfer  enough  to  make 
the  Scotts  take  the  place  of  prominence  that  had  been  held  by  the  Elliotts 
in  the  original  form  of  the  story.  See  The  Trustworthiness  of  Border 
Ballads  as  Exemplified  by  'Jamie  Telfer  i'  the  Fair  Dodhead'  and  other 
Ballads;  by  Lieut.-Col.  the  Hon.  Fitzwilliam  Elliott.  Reviewed  in  Edin- 
burgh Review,  No.  418,  p.  306   (October,   1906). 

1  See  the  examples  given  in  the  preceding  note.  Most  of  the  changes 
there   spoken   of  were   made  without   annotation. 

2  This  extraordinary  young  man  was  poet  and  scholar  on  his  own  account 
by  1800,  though  he  was  four  years  younger  than  Scott.  His  erudition  in 
many  fields  was  remarkable,  and  he  was  as  enthusiastic  as  Scott  himself 
about  Scotch  poetry,  and  was  the  chief  assistant  in  gathering  ballads   for 


26  SCOTT   AS    A   CRITIC    OF   LITERATURE 

down  a  ballad  from  recitation  in  such  a  way  as  to  produce  a 
more  finished  poem  than  one  would  expect  a  traditional  ballad 
to  be.  And  Hogg,1  who  supplied  several  ballads  from  the  reci- 
tations of  his  mother  and  other  old  people,  was  probably  still 
less  strict.  "  Sure  no  man,"  he  is  quoted  as  having  said,  "  will 
think  an  old  song  the  worse  of  being  somewhat  harmonious."2 
Yet  it  is  easy  to  see  that  Scott's  friends  might  have  acted  dif- 
ferently if  his  own  practice  had  favored  absolute  fidelity  to  the 
texts. 

A  remark  in  Scott's  review  of  Evans's  Old  Ballads  seems  a 
pretty  definite  arraignment  of  his  own  procedure.  "  It  may  be 
asked  by  the  severer  antiquary  of  the  present  day,  why  an 
editor,  thinking  it  necessary  to  introduce  such  alterations  in 
order  to  bring  forth  a  new,  beautiful,  and  interesting  sense 
from  a  meagre  or  corrupted  original,  did  not  in  good  faith 
to  his  readers  acquaint  them  with  the  liberties  he  had  taken 
and  make  them  judge  whether  in  so  doing  he  transgressed  his 
limits.  We  answer  that  unquestionably  such  would  be  the 
express  duty  of  a  modern  editor,  but  such  were  not  the  rules 
of  the  service  when  Dr.  Percy  first  opened  the  campaign."3 

One  wonders  whether  the  "  rules  of  the  service  "  did  not  in 
Scott's  opinion  occasionally  permit  a  little  wilful  mystification. 
The  case  of  Kinmont  Willie  tempts  one  to  such  an  explanation. 

the  Minstrelsy.  He  also  collected  the  material  for  the  essay  on  Fairies  in 
the  second  volume,  which  was  especially  praised  by  the  reviewer  in  the 
Edinburgh  Review  (January,  1803).  Leyden's  chief  fame  was  derived 
from  his  wonderfully  varied  activities  in  India,  from  1803  to  his  early 
death  in  181 1.  Any  reader  of  Lockhart's  Life  of  Scott  or  of  Scott's 
delightful  little  memoir,  published  first  in  the  Edinburgh  Annual  Register 
for  181 1,  and  included  in  the  Miscellaneous  Prose  Works,  must  feel  that 
the  uncouth  young  genius  is  a  familiar  acquaintance. 

1  The  Ettrick  Shepherd,  who,  after  reading  the  first  two  volumes  of  the 
Minstrelsy,  sought  an  acquaintance  with  Scott,  and  offered  assistance  which 
was  gladly  made  use  of  in  the  preparation  of  the  third  volume.  Scott  in 
his  turn  provided  much  of  the  material  for  Hogg's  Jacobite  Relics,  pub- 
lished in  1810.  The  following  note  on  one  of  the  songs  in  that  work  adds 
to  the  reader's  doubts  concerning  the  accuracy  of  Scott's  texts :  "  I  have 
not  altered  a  word  from  the  manuscript,  which  is  in  the  handwriting  of 
an  amanuensis  of  Mr.  Scott's,  the  most  incorrect  transcriber,  perhaps,  that 
ever  tried  the  business."  {Jacobite  Relics,  Vol.  I,  p.  282.  Note  on  song 
lxiii.) 

2  Henderson's  edition  of  the  Minstrelsy,  Vol.  I,  p.  284. 

3  Quarterly,  May,   1810. 


MINSTRELSY   OF   THE   SCOTTISH    BORDER  27 

Besides  the  capital  instance  of  his  anonymity  as  regards  the 
novels,  Scott  several  times  seemed  to  amuse  himself  in  per- 
plexing the  public.  There  was  the  case  of  the  Bridal  of  Trier- 
main,  which  he  tried  by  means  of  various  careful  devices  to 
pass  off  as  the  work  of  a  friend.  But  perhaps  the  best  ex- 
ample appears  in  connection  with  The  Fortunes  of  Nigel.  He 
first  designed  the  material  of  that  book  for  a  series  of  "  private 
letters  "  purporting  to  have  been  written  in  the  reign  of  James 
I.,  but  when  he  had  finally  complied  with  the  advice  of  his 
friends  and  used  it  for  a  novel,  he  said  to  Lockhart,  "  You 
were  all  quite  right :  if  the  letters  had  passed  for  genuine,  they 
would  have  found  favour  only  with  a  few  musty  antiquaries."1 
This  suggests  comparison  with  the  conduct  of  his  friend  Robert 
Surtees,  who  palmed  off  upon  him  three  whole  ballads  of  his 
own  and  got  them  inserted  in  the  Minstrelsy  as  ancient,  with  a 
plausible  tale  concerning  the  circumstances  of  their  recovery. 
Surtees,  one  is  interested  to  observe,  never  dared  tell  Scott  the 
truth,  and  Scott  always  accepted  the  ballads  as  genuine — a  lack 
of  discernment  rather  compromising  in  an  editor,  though  one 
may  perhaps  excuse  him  on  the  ground  of  his  confidence  in  his 
brother  antiquary.2 

In  one  direction  Scott  seems  to  have  been  more  conscientious 
than  we  might  be  inclined  to  suppose  after  seeing  the  discrep- 
ancy between  the  standard  of  exactness  that  his  own  statements 
lead  us  to  expect  and  the  results  that  actually  appear.  I  believe 
that  he  intended  to  preserve  the  manuscript  texts  just  as  he 
received  them,  and  that  he  would  have  wished  to  have  them 
given  to  the  public  when  the  public  was  prepared  to  want  them. 
To  support  this  theory  we  have  first  the  fact  that  most  of  his 
own  emendations  have  been  traced  by  means  of  the  manu- 

1  Lockhart,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  514. 

2  Still  more  striking  evidence  that  Scott  lacked  an  infallible  sense  of  the 
difference  between  genuine  and  spurious  ballad  material  is  afforded  by  his 
comments  on  Peter  Buchan's  collection,  which  is  now  considered  par- 
ticularly untrustworthy.  He  thought  that  with  two  or  three  exceptions 
the  pieces  in  the  book  were  genuine,  and  said :  "  I  scarce  know  anything 
so  easily  discovered  as  the  piecing  and  patching  of  an  old  ballad ;  the  darns 
in  a  silk  stocking  are  not  more  manifest."  (Correspondence  of  C.  K. 
Sharpe,  Vol.  II,  p.  424.) 


28  SCOTT   AS    A    CRITIC   OF   LITERATURE 

scripts  which  he  used.1  It  is  significant  that  in  speaking  of  a 
poet  who  had  altered  a  manuscript  to  suit  a  revised  reading  he 
grew  indignant  over  that  fault  far  more  than  over  the  mere 
change  in  the  published  version.  The  Raid  of  the  Reidsivire, 
he  said,  "  first  appeared  in  Allan  Ramsay's  Evergreen,  but  some 
liberties  have  been  taken  by  him  in  transcribing  it;  and,  what 
is  altogether  unpardonable,  the  manuscript,  which  is  itself 
rather  inaccurate,  has  been  interpolated  to  favour  his  readings ; 
of  which  there  remain  obvious  marks."2  Scott  said  also  that 
the  time  had  come  for  the  publication  of  Percy's  folio  manu- 
script; though  we  must  believe  that  he  would  not  have  wished 
to  see  the  manuscript  published  until  the  ballads  had  become 
familiar  to  the  world  in  what  he  considered  a  beautified  form. 
The  changes  Scott  made  were  usually  in  style  rather  than  in 
substance.  Often  he  merely  substituted  an  archaic  word  for 
a  modern  one ;  but  often  whole  lines  and  longer  passages 
offered  temptations  which  the  poet  in  him  could  not  resist,  and 
he  "  improved  "  lavishly.  For  example,  we  have  his  note  on 
Earl  Richard — "  The  best  verses  are  here  selected  from  both 
copies,  and  some  trivial  alterations  have  been  adopted  from 
tradition,"  —  with  •  the  comment  by  Mr.  Henderson  —  "  The 
emendations  of  Scott  are  so  many,  and  the  majority  relate  so 
entirely  to  style,  that  no  mere  tradition  could  have  supplied 
them."3  His  versions  are  in  general  characterized  by  a  smooth- 
ness and  precision  of  meter  which  to  the  student  of  ballads  is 
very  suspicious.  But  he  seems  occasionally  to  have  altered 
or  supplied  incidents  as  well  as  phrases.     The  historical  event 

1  Scott's  manuscript  collections  of  ballads  dropped  partially  out  of  sight 
after  his  death,  and  it  was  only  about  1890  that  their  magnitude  and  im- 
portance became  known.  Professor  Child  and  later  editors  have  found 
them  of  very  great  service.  (On  Child's  use  of  the  Abbotsford  materials, 
see  the  Advertisement  to  Part  VIII  of  his  collection,  contained  in  Volume 
IV.)  In  1880  appeared  a  reprint  of  the  Ballad  Book  of  C.  K.  Sharpe, 
"  with  notes  and  ballads  from  the  unpublished  manuscripts  of  C.  K.  Sharpe 
and  Sir  Walter  Scott,"  but  the  contributions  from  Scott's  papers  did  not 
amount  to  much.  Scott's  materials  were  at  the  service  of  his  friend  for 
use  in  the  original  edition  of  the  Ballad  Book,  published  in  1823.  See 
Sharpe's  Correspondence,  Vol.  II,  pp.  264,  271  and  325,  for  letters  from 
Scott  on  this  subject. 

2  Note  on  The  Raid  of  the  Reidswire,  in  the  Minstrelsy. 

3  Henderson's  edition  of  the  Minstrelsy,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  232. 


MINSTRELSY   OF   THE   SCOTTISH    BORDER  29 

which  furnished  the  purpose  for  the  expedition  of  Sir  Patrick 
Spens  seems  to  have  been  introduced  into  the  ballad  by  Scott, 
and  Mr.  Henderson  thinks  that  "  when  the  deeds  of  his  ances- 
tors were  concerned  it  was  impossible  for  him  to  resist  the 
temptation  to  employ  some  of  his  own  minstrel  art  on  their 
behalf."1 

Certainly  Scott's  qualifications  for  evolving  true  poetry  out 
of  the  crude  fragments  that  sometimes  served  as  a  basis  formed 
a  very  unusual  combination  when  they  were  united  with  his 
knowledge  of  early  history  and  literature.  lie  had  such  con- 
fidence in  his  own  powers  in  this  direction  that  he  at  one  time 
intended  to  write  a  series  of  imitations  of  Scottish  poets  of 
different  periods,  from  Thomas  the  Rhymer  down,  and  thus  to 
exhibit  changes  in  language  as  well  as  variations  in  literary 
style.2  He  evidently  thought  that  the  ballads  as  they  appeared 
in  the  Minstrelsy  were  truer  to  their  originals  than  were  the 
copies  he  was  able  to  procure  from  recitation.  Lockhart  gives 
him  precisely  the  kind  of  praise  he  would  have  desired,  in  say- 
ing, "  From  among  a  hundred  corruptions  he  seized  with  in- 
stinctive tact  the  primitive  diction  and  imagery."3 

It  is  evident  that  Scott's  public  did  not  wish  him  to  be  more 
careful  than  he  was  in  discriminating  between  new  and  old 
matter.  One  of  his  moments  of  strict  veracity  seems  even  to 
have  occasioned  some  annoyance  to  the  wrriter  of  the  Edin- 
burgh article,  who  apparently  preferred  to  believe  in  the  an- 
tiquity of  The  Flowers  of  the  Forest  rather  than  to  learn  that 
"  the  most  positive  evidence  "  proved  its  modern  origin.  The 
editor's  introduction  to  the  poem  seems  perfectly  clear;  he 
names  his  authority  and  quotes  two  verses  which  are  ancient  ;4 
but  the  reviewer  says  with  a  perverse  irritability:  "Mr.  Scott 
would  have  done  well  to  tell  us  how  much  he  deems  ancient, 
and  to  give  us  the  'positive  evidence'  that  convinced  him  the 
zi'Iiole  was  not  so."5  This  review  was,  however,  for  the  most 
part  favorable. 

The  fact  that  Scott  included  modern  imitations  of  the  ballad 

1  Henderson's  edition  of  the  Minstrelsy.  Vol.   II.  p.   57. 
2 Lockhart,  Vol.  I,  p.  360.  3Jbid.,  Vol.  I,  p.  332. 

4  First  edition  of  the  Minstrelsy,  Vol.  II,  pp.   156-7. 
5 Edinburgh   Review,  January,    1803. 


30  SCOTT  AS  A  CRITIC  OF  LITERATURE 

in  his  book  is  another  indication  that  his  attitude  was  like  that 
of  his  predecessors.1  Doubtless  these  helped  the  Minstrelsy  to 
sell,  but  a  more  modern  taste  would  choose  to  put  them  in  a 
place  by  themselves,  not  in  a  collection  of  old  ballads.  An 
essay  on  Imitations  of  the  Ancient  Ballad  was  written,  as  were 
the  Remarks  on  Popular  Poetry,  for  the  1833  edition.  It  is 
chiefly  interesting  for  its  autobiographical  matter,  though  it 
also  contains  criticisms  of  Burns  and  other  writers  of  ballad 
poetry — "  a  species  of  literary  labour  which  the  author  has 
himself  pursued  with  some  success."2  Scott's  statement  that 
the  ballad  style  was  very  popular  at  the  time  he  began  to  write, 
and  that  he  followed  the  prevailing  fashion,  was  one  of  many 
examples  of  his  modesty,  taken  in  connection  with  the  remark 
in  another  part  of  the  essay  to  the  effect  that  this  style  "  had 
much  to  recommend  it,  especially  as  it  presented  considerable 
facilities  to  those  who  wished  at  as  little  exertion  or  trouble  as 
possible  to  attain  for  themselves  a  certain  degree  of  literary 
reputation."  To  complete  the  comparison,  however,  we  need 
an  observation  found  in  one  of  Scott's  reviews,  on  the  spu- 
rious ballad  poetry,  full  of  false  sentiment,  sometimes  written 
in  the  eighteenth  century.  "  It  is  the  very  last  refuge  of  those 
who  can  do  nothing  better  in  the  shape  of  verse ;  and  a  man 

1  The  Minstrelsy  is  arranged  in  three  parts :  I.,  Historical  Ballads  ;  II., 
Romantic  Ballads ;  III.,  Imitations  of  the  Ballad.  The  first  part  is  preceded 
by  the  Introductory  Remarks  on  Popular  Poetry,  and  by  the  historical 
introduction.  The  second  part  is  preceded  by  the  essay  on  The  Fairies  of 
Popular  Superstition ;  and  the  third  by  the  essay  on  Imitations  of  the 
Ancient  Ballad.  The  poems  by  Scott  given  in  this  third  part  are  as  fol- 
lows:  Thomas  the  Rhymer  (parts  2  and  3),  Glenfinlas,  The  Eve  of  St. 
John,  Cadyow  Castle,  The  Gray  Brother,  War  Song  of  the  Royal  Edinburgh 
Light  Dragoons.  Besides  these  there  are  three  poems  by  John  Leyden 
(and  he  has  also  an  Ode  on  Scottish  Music  preceding  the  Romantic  bal- 
lads), two  by  C.  K.  Sharpe,  three  by  John  Marriott,  who  was  tutor  to  the 
children  of  the  Duke  of  Buccleuch,  and  one  each  by  Matthew  Lewis,  Anna 
Seward,  Dr.  Jamieson,  Colin  Mackenzie,  J.  B.  S.  Morritt,  and  an  unnamed 
author.  In  the  other  parts  of  the  book  there  are  a  few  imitations,  notably 
the  three  by  Surtees — Lord  Ewine,  the  Death  of  Feathcrstonhaugh,  and 
Barthram's  Dirge,  which  Scott  supposed  were  old ;  and  one  or  two  like 
the  Floivers  of  the  Forest,  which  he  noted  as  largely  modern,  or  which 
he  had  found,  after  arranging  his  material,  to  be  wholly  modern.  Nearly 
forty  old  ballads  were  published  in  the  Minstrelsy  for  the  first  time. 

2  Remarks  on  Popular  Poetry,  conclusion. 


MINSTRELSY    OF    mm     SCOTTISH    BORDEB  .'51 

of   genius    should    disdain    to    invade    the   province   of   these 
dawdling-  rhymers."1 

Scott's  criticism  of  ballad  style  probably  suffered  from  his 
interest  in  modern  imitations  of  ballads.  Perhaps  also  the  real 
quality  of  ancient  popular  poetry  was  a  little  obscured  for  him 
by  his  belief  that  it  was  written  by  professional  or  semi-profes- 
sional poets.  If  he  wrote  Kinmont  Willie,  he  succeeded  in 
catching'  the  right  tone  better  than  anyone  since  him  has  been 
able  to  do,  but  even  in  this  poem  there  are  turns  of  phrase  that 
remind  one  of  the  Lay  of  the  Last  Minstrel  rather  than  of  the 
true  folk-song.2  After  his  first  attempts  at  versifying  he  re- 
ceived from  William  Taylor,  of  Norwich,  who  had  made  an 
earlier  translation  of  Burger's  Lenorc,  a  letter  of  hearty  praise 
intermingled  with  very  sensible  remarks  about  the  tendency  in 
some  parts  of  Scott's  Chase  toward  too  great  elaboration.3 
Scott's  answer  was  as  follows :  "  I  do  not  .  .  .  think  quite  so 
severely  of  the  Darwinian  style,  as  to  deem  it  utterly  incon- 
sistent with  the  ballad,  which,  at  least  to  judge  from  the  exam- 
ples left  us  by  antiquity,  admits  in  some  cases  of  a  considerable 
degree  of  decoration.  Still,  however,  I  do  most  sincerely  agree 
with  you,  that  this  may  be  very  easily  overdone,  and  I  am  far 
from  asserting  that  this  may  not  be  in  some  degree  my  own 
case;  but  there  is  scarcely  so  nice  a  line  to  distinguish,  as  that 
which  divides  true  simplicity  from  flatness  and  Sternholdianism 
(if  I  may  be  allowed  to  coin  the  word),  and  therefore  it  is  not 
surprising,  that  in  endeavouring  to  avoid  the  latter,  so  young 
and  inexperienced  a  rhymer  as  myself  should  sometimes  have 
deviated  also  from  the  former."4  This  was  Scott's  earliest 
stage  as  a  man  of  letters,  and  he  evidently  learned  more  about 
ballads  later.  But  there  appears  in  much  of  his  criticism  on 
the  subject  a  limitation  which  may  be  assigned  partly  to  his 

1  Review  of  the  Poems  of  William  Herbert.  Edinburgh  Review,  October, 
1806. 

2  Stanzas  10-12,  and  31,  are  noted  by  Child  as  particularly  suspicious. 
"  Basnet."  which  occurs  in  stanza  10,  is  not  a  very  common  word  in  ballads. 
It  is  used  in  The  Lay,  Canto  I.,  stanza  25,  and  in  Mannion,  Canto  VI,  st.  21. 

3  Lockhart,  Vol.  I,  p.  221. 

*  Memoir  of  William  Taylor,  Vol.  1,  pp.  98-99,  and  see  Sharpe's  Corre- 
spondence, Vol.  I,  pp.  146-7,  for  a  letter  to  Sharpe  on  a  similar  point. 


32  SCOTT   AS   A   CRITIC   OF   LITERATURE 

time,  and  partly,  no  doubt,  to  the  fact  that  he  was  a  poet  and 
could  not  forget  all  the  sophistications  of  his  art. 

The  true  nature  of  ballad  poetry  could  hardly  be  understood 
until  scholars  had  investigated  the  structure  of  primitive  so- 
ciety in  a  way  that  Scott's  contemporaries  were  not  at  all  pre- 
pared to  do.  Even  Scott,  with  all  his  intelligent  interest  in 
by-gone  institutions  and  modes  of  expression,  could  hardly 
have  foreseen  the  anthropological  researches  which  the  problem 
of  literary  origins  has  since  demanded.  We  do  not  find,  then, 
that  Scott's  work  on  ballads  was  marked  by  any  special  origi- 
nality in  point  of  view  or  method.  The  Minstrelsy  of  the  Scot- 
tish Border  was  a  notable  book  because  it  did  better  what  other 
men  had  tried  to  do,  and  especially  because  of  the  charm  and 
effectiveness  of  its  historical  comment.  It  was  more  trust- 
worthy than  Percy's  collection  and  more  graceful  than  Ritson's ; 
it  was  richer  than  other  books  of  the  kind  in  what  people  cared 
to  have  when  they  wanted  ballads,  and  yet  was  not,  for  its  time, 
over-sophisticated.  Scott's  conclusions  cannot  now  be  accepted 
without  question,  but  the  illustrations  with  which  he  sets  them 
forth  and  the  wide  reading  and  sincere  love  of  folk-poetry 
which  evidently  lie  behind  them  produce  a  pleasant  effect  of 
ripe  and  reasonable  judgment.  The  admirable  qualities  of 
the  book  were  at  once  recognized  by  competent  critics,  and  it 
will  always  be  studied  with  enthusiasm  by  scholars  as  well  as 
by  the  uncritical  lover  of  ballads. 

Studies  in  the  Romances 

Scott's  theory  as  to  the  connection  between  ballads  and  romances  — 
His  early  fondness  for  romances  —  His  acquaintance  with  Romance 
languages  —  His  work  on  the  Sir  Tristrem  —  Value  of  his  edition  — 
Special  quality  of  Scott's  interest  in  the  Middle  Ages  —  General  theo- 
ries expressed  in  the  body  of  his  work  on  romances  —  His  type  of 
scholarship. 

Ballads  and  romances  are  so  closely  related  that  Scott's 
early  and  lasting  interest  in  the  one  form  naturally  grew  out 
of  his  interest  in  the  other.  He  held  the  theory  that  "  the 
romantic  ballads  of  later  times  are  for  the  most  part  abridg- 
ments of  the  ancient  metrical  romances,  narrated  in  a  smoother 


STUDIES   IN   TI1K   ROMANCES  88 

stanza  ami  more  modern  language."1  It  is  not  surprising, 
then,  that  a  considerable  body  of  his  critical  work  has  to  do 
with  the  subject  of  mediaeval  romance. 

Throughout  his  boyhood  Scott  read  all  the  fairy  tales,  eastern 
stories,  and  romances  of  knight-errantry  that  fell  in  his  way. 
When  he  was  about  thirteen,  he  and  a  young  friend  used  to 
spend  hours  reading  together  such  authors  as  Spenser,  Ariosto, 
•  and  Boiardo.2  He  remembered  the  poems  so  well  that  weeks 
or  months  afterwards  he  could  repeat  whole  pages  that  had 
particularly  impressed  him.  Somewhat  later  the  two  boys  im- 
provised similar  stories  to  recite  to  each  other,  Scott  being 
the  one  who  proposed  the  plan  and  the  more  successful  in 
carrying  it  out.  With  this  same  friend  he  studied  Italian  and 
began  to  read  the  Italian  poets  in  the  original.  \n  his  auto- 
biography he  says  :3  "  I  had  previously  renewed  and  extended 
my  knowledge  of  the  French  language,  from  the  same  prin- 
ciple of  romantic  research.  Tressan's  romances,  the  Biblio- 
theque  Bleue,  and  Bibliotheque  de  Romans,  were  already  fa- 
miliar to  me,  and  I  now  acquired  similar  intimacy  with  the 
works  of  Dante,  Boiardo,  Pulci,  and  other  eminent  Italian 
authors."  Writing  some  years  later  he  remarked :  "  I  was 
once  the  most  enormous  devourer  of  the  Italian  romantic 
poetry,  which  indeed  is  the  only  poetry  of  their  country  which 
I  ever  had  much  patience  for ;  for  after  all  that  has  been  said 
of  Petrarch  and  his  school,  I  am  always  tempted  to  exclaim 
like  honest  Christopher  Sly,  '  Marvellous  good  matter,  would 
it  were  done.'  But  with  Charkmagne  and  his  paladins  I  could 
dwell  forever."4  Scott  learned  languages  easily,  and  he  read 
Spanish  with  about  as  much  facility  as  Italian.  Don  Quixote 
seems  often  to  be  the  guide  with  whom  he  chooses  to  traverse 
the  fields  of  romance.5  In  Scott's  boyhood  one  of  his  teachers 
noticed  that  he  could  follow  and  enjoy  the  meaning  of  what  he 

1  Minstrelsy,  Introduction  to  Lord  Thomas  and  Fair  Annie. 

2Lockhart,  Vol.  I,  p.    101.  3  Ibid.,   Vol.   I,  pp.  35-6. 

*  Familiar  Letters,  Vol.  I,  p.  244.     See  also  Lockhart,  Vol.  V,  p.  408. 

5  Sometime  before  1821  (probably  a  good  while  before,  but  the  date 
cannot  be  fixed),  Scott  began  a  translation  of  Don  Quixote,  and  afterwards 
gave  the  work  over  to  Lockhart,  who  completed  it.  See  Constable's  Cor- 
respondence, Vol.  Ill,  p.  161. 


34  SCOTT   AS   A   CRITIC    OF   LITERATURE 

read  in  Latin  better  than  many  of  his  school-fellows  who  knew 
more  about  the  language,  and  it  was  the  same  all  through  his 
life — he  got  what  he  wanted  from  foreign  literatures  with  very- 
little  trouble. 

Scott  constantly  refers  to  the  work  of  Percy,  Warton,  Tres- 
san, l  Ritson,  and  Ellis,  in  the  study  of  ancient  romances,  but 
in  editing  Sir  Tristrem  he  made  one  part  of  the  field  his  own, 
and  became  the  authority  whom  he  felt  obliged  to  quote  in  the 
Essay  on  Romance. 

Thomas  the  Rhymer  of  Erceldoune  was  at  first  an  object  of 
interest  to  Scott  because  of  the  ballad  of  True  Thomas  and  the 
traditions  concerning  him  that  floated  about  the  countryside. 
The  "  Rhymer's  Glen  "  was  afterwards  a  cherished  possession 
of  Scott's  own  on  the  Abbotsford  estate.  In  the  Advocates' 
Library  at  Edinburgh,  of  which  Scott  was  in  1795  appointed  a 
curator,  was  an  important  manuscript  that  contained  among 
other  metrical  romances  one  professing  to  be  a  copy  of  that 
written  by  Thomas  of  Erceldoune  on  Sir  Tristrem.  From  a 
careful  piecing  together  of  evidence  furnished  by  this  poem  and 
by  Robert  of  Brunne,  with  the  assistance  of  certain  legal  docu- 
ments which  supplied  dates,  Scott  built  up  about  the  old  poet 
a  theory  that  he  elaborated  in  his  edition  of  Sir  Tristrem,  pub- 
lished in  1804,  and  that  continued  to  interest  him  vividly  as 
long  as  he  lived.  It  reappears  in  many  of  his  critical  writings2 
and  also  in  the  novels.  In  the  Bride  of  Lammcrmoor  Ravens- 
wood  goes  to  his  death  in  compliance  with  the  prophecy  of 
Thomas  quoted  by  the  superstitious  Caleb  Balderstone.  And  in 
Castle  Dangerous  Bertram,  who  is  unconvincing  perhaps 
because  he  is  endowed  with  the  literary  and  antiquarian  tastes 
of  a  Walter  Scott  himself,  is  actuated  by  an  irrepressible  desire 
to  discover  works  of  the  Rhymer. 

1  Louis-Elizabeth  de  la  Vergne,  Comte  de  Tressan,  was  born  in  1705  and 
died  in  1783.  In  early  life  he  was  sent  to  Rome  on  diplomatic  business, 
and  it  is  said  that  in  the  Vatican  library  he  acquired  his  taste  for  the 
literature  of  chivalry.  His  chief  works  were  Amadis  de  Gaules  (1779)  ! 
Roland  furieux  (translated  from  the  Italian,  1780)  ;  Corps  d'extraits  romans 
de  chevalerie  (1782).  His  translations  were  partly  adaptations,  and  were 
far  from  being  rendered  with  precision. 

2  See  particularly  his  article  on  Ellis's  and  Ritson's  Metrical  Romances 
(Edinburgh  Review,  January,  1806),  the  essay  on  Romance,  and  Remarks 
on  Popular  Poetry  in  the  Minstrelsy. 


STUDIES  IN  THE   ROMANCES  36 

Scott's  edition  of  Sir  Tristretn  gives — besides  the  text,  intro- 
duction, and  notes — a  short  conclusion  written  by  himself  in 
imitation  of  the  original  poet's  style.  Much  of  his  theory  has 
fallen.  He  considered  this  Sir  Tristretn  to  be  the  first  of  the 
written  versions  of  that  story,  a  supposition  that  was  not  long 
tenable.  The  poem  is  now  known  to  be  based  upon  a  French 
original,  and  many  scholars  think  the  name  Erceldoune  was 
arbitrarily  inserted  by  the  English  translator;  though  Mr. 
McNeill,  the  latest  editor,  thinks  there  is  a  "  reasonable  proba- 
bility "  in  favor  of  Scott's  opinion  that  the  author  was  the  his- 
toric Thomas,  who  flourished  in  the  thirteenth  century.  It  is 
important,  however,  that  Scott's  scholarship  in  the  matter 
passed  muster  at  that  time  with  such  men  as  Ellis,  who  wrote 
the  review  in  the  Edinburgh,  in  which  he  said,  "Upon  the 
whole  we  are  much  disposed  to  adopt  the  general  inferences 
drawn  by  Mr.  Scott  from  his  authorities,  and  have  great 
pleasure  in  bearing  testimony  to  the  very  uncommon  diligence 
which  he  has  evinced  in  collecting  curious  materials,  and  to  the 
taste  and  sagacity  with  which  he  has  employed  them.  .  .  . 
With  regard  to  the  notes,  they  contain  an  almost  infinite  variety 
of  curious  information,  which  had  been  hitherto  unknown  or 
unnoticed."1  John  Hookham  Frere  said,  as  quoted  in  a  letter 
by  Ellis,  "  I  consider  Sir  Tristretn  as  by  far  the  most  interesting 
work  that  has  as  yet  been  published  on  the  subject  of  our 
earliest  poets."2  Scott's  opinions  were  in  1824  thought  to  be 
of  sufficient  importance,  either  from  their  own  merits  or  on 
account  of  his  later  fame,  to  call  forth  a  dissertation  appended 
to  the  edition  of  YVarton's  History  of  English  Poetry  published 
in  that  year. 

The  first  edition  of  the  text  swarms  with  errors,  according  to 
Kolbing,3  a  recent  editor  of  the  romance,  and  later  editions  are 

Edinburgh  Review,  July,  1804.  Ellis  and  Scott  had  had  much  corre- 
spondence on  Sir  Tristretn,  and  it  was  Ellis's  queries  that  first  led  Scott 
into  the  detailed  investigation  which  resulted  in  the  separate  publication 
of  the  work.  He  had  intended  to  print  it  in  the  Minstrelsy  {Lockhart, 
Vol.  I,  p.  289).     The  letters  are  given  in  Lockhart,  Vol.  I. 

2  Lockhart,  Vol.   I,  p.  381. 

3  Die  nordischc  und  die  englische  Version  der  Tristan-sage — II.  Sir 
Tristrem.  Heilbronn,  1882.  Mr.  George  P.  McNeill's  edition  of  Sir 
Tristrem  was  printed  for  the  Scottish  Text  Society,  Edinburgh,  1886. 


36  SCOTT   AS    A    CRITIC    OF   LITERATURE 

still  very  inaccurate.  It  could  hardly  be  expected  that  a  man 
with  Scott's  habits  of  mind  would  edit  a  text  accurately.  But 
no  one  of  that  period  was  competent  to  construct  a  text  that 
would  seem  satisfactory  now.  The  study  of  English  philology 
was  not  sufficiently  developed  in  that  direction,  nor  did  scholars 
appreciate  either  the  difficulties  or  the  requirements  of  text- 
criticism.  It  is  not  to  be  wondered  at  that  Scott  failed,  in  this 
instance  as  well  as  afterwards  in  the  case  of  the  text  of  Dryden, 
to  give  a  version  that  would  stand  the  minute  scrutiny  of  later 
scholarship. 

His  sympathies  were  rather  with  the  scholar  who  opens  the 
store  of  old  poetry  to  the  public,  than  with  him  who  uses  his 
erudition  simply  for  the  benefit  of  erudite  people.  The  diction 
of  the  Middle  Ages  was  interesting  to  him  only  as  it  reflected 
the  customs  and  emotions  of  its  period.  He  used  the  romances 
as  authorities  on  ancient  manners.  The  Chronicles  of  Frois- 
sart,  because  they  give  "  a  knowledge  of  mankind,"2  were 
almost  as  much  a  hobby  with  him  as  Thomas  the  Rhymer,  and 
in  this  case  also  he  endows  characters  in  his  novels  with  his 
own  fondness  for  the  ancient  writer.3  The  fruit  of  Scott's 
acquaintance  with  Froissart  appears  prominently  in  his  essay  on 
Chivalry  and  in  various  introductions  to  ballads  in  the  Min- 
strelsy, as  well  as  in  the  novels  of  chivalry.     Scott  at  one  time 

1  Kolbing  thinks  Scott  probably  hired  a  transcriber  who  knew  nothing 
of  Middle  English — a  usual  method  of  procedure  in  the  beginning  of  the 
nineteenth  century.  In  later  editions  more  errors  were  introduced  by  the 
carelessness  of  printers,  until,  after  1830,  when  the  book  was  included  in 
the  complete  editions  of  Scott's  poems,  the  text  was  collated  with  the  manu- 
script. But  it  was  still  far  from  correct.  Kolbing  enumerates  about  a 
hundred  and  thirty  mistakes  (see  his  Introduction,  p.  xvii).  Of  these  I 
took  twenty-one  at  random,  and  found  that  eight  of  them  did  not  occur  in 
the  1806  edition — in  other  words,  the  person  who  collated  the  text  nearly 
thirty  years  after  Scott  or  his  hired  transcriber  had  done  it  was  far  from 
infallible.  A  few  illustrations  may  be  given  of  mistakes  that  occur  in  both 
the  1806  and  the  1833  editions:  1.  117,  send  is  given  for  sent;  1.  846,  telle 
for  tel ;  1.  863,  How  for  Hon;  1.  912,  mak  for  make;  1.  1212,  leuedi  for 
leuedy ;  1.  1580,  wende  sche  weren  for  whende  sche  were;  1.  1334,  haue 
for  lian ;  1.  1514,  as  for  als. 

2  Review  of  Johnes's  Translation  of  Froissart,  Edinburgh  Reviczv,  Janu- 
ary,  1805. 

:!  Waverley,  and  Claverhouse  in  Old  Mortality. 


STUDIES   IN    TlIK    ROMANCES  '■'>! 

proposed  to  publish  an  edition  of  Malory,  but  abandoned  the 
project  on  learning  that  Southey  had  the  same  thing  in  mind.1 

The  first  periodical  review  Scott  ever  published  was  on  the 
subject  vi  the  Amadis  de  Gaul,  as  translated  b\  Southey  and 
by  Rose.  The  artiele  is  long  and  very  carefully  constructed, 
and  expresses  many  ideas  on  the  subjeet  of  the  mediaeval 
romance  in  general  that  reappear  again  and  again,  particularly 
in  the  essay  on  Romance  written  in  1X23  for  the  Encyclopedia 
Britannica.  Among  these  general  ideas  that  found  frequent 
expression  in  his  critical  writings,  one  which  in  the  light  of  his 
creative  work  becomes  particularly  interesting  to  us  is  his 
judgment  on  the  distinctions  between  metrical  and  prose  ro- 
mances. He  always  preferred  the  poems,  though  he  was  so 
interested  in  the  prose  stories  that  he  talked  about  them  with 
much  enthusiasm,  and  it  sometimes  seems  as  if  he  liked  best 
the  kind  he  happened  to  be  analyzing  at  the  moment. 

Other  matters  that  necessarily  presented  themselves  when  he 
was  treating  the  subject  of  romance  were  the  problem  of  the 
sources  of  narrative  material,  especially  the  perplexed  question 
concerning  the  development  of  the  Arthurian  cycle,  and  the 
problem,  already  discussed  in  connection  with  ballads,  concern- 
ing the  character  of  minstrels.  The  minstrels  reappear  through- 
out Scott's  studies  in  mediaeval  literature,  and  were  perhaps 
more  interesting  to  him  than  any  other  part  of  the  subject. 
Though,  as  we  have  seen,  he  formulated  a  compromise  between 
the  opposing  opinions  of  Percy  and  Ritson,  no  one  who  reads 
the  description  of  the  Last  Minstrel  can  doubt  what  was  the 
picture  that  he  preferred  to  carry  in  his  mind. 

His  ideas  on  the  subject  of  the  origin  and  diffusion  of  narra- 
tive material  were  those  of  the  sensible  man  trying  to  look  at 
the  matter  in  a  reasonable  way.  Here  again  he  adopted  an 
attitude  of  compromise,  in  that  he  admitted  the  partial  truth 
of  various  theories  which  he  considered  erroneous  only  in  sq 
far  as  any  one  of  them  was  stretched  beyond  its  proper  com- 
pass. "  Romance,"  ne  said,  "  was  like  a  compound  metal, 
derived  from  various  mines,  and  in  the  different  specimens  of 
which  one  metal  or  other  was  alternately  predominant."-' 

1  Lockhart,  Vol.  I,  pp.  480  and  482.     Familiar  Letters,  Vol.  I.  p.    147. 

2  Essay  on  Romance. 


38  SCOTT   AS   A   CRITIC    OF   LITERATURE 

On  the  subject  of  the  Arthurian  cycle,  the  origin  of  which 
has  never  ceased  to  be  matter  for  debate,  he  held  essentially 
the  opinions  that  the  highest  French  authority  has  adopted — 
that  Celtic  traditions  were  the  foundation,  and  that  the  metrical 
romances  preceded  those  in  prose.1  The  important  offices  of 
French  poets  in  giving  form  to  the  story  he  underestimated. 
When  he  said,  "  It  is  now  completely  proved,  that  the  earliest 
and  best  French  romances  were  composed  for  the  meridian  of 
the  English  court,"2  he  fell  into  the  error  that  has  not  always 
been  avoided  by  scholars  who  have  since  written  on  the  subject, 
of  feeling  certitude  about  a  proposition  in  which  there  is  no 
certainty. 

Scott's  work  on  romances,  though  it  does  not  always  rise 
above  commonplaceness,  escapes  the  perfunctory  quality  of 
hack  writing  by  virtue  of  his  keen  interest  in  the  subject.  He 
continued  to  like  this  prosaic  kind  of  literary  task  even  while 
he  was  writing  novels  with  the  most  wonderful  facility.  We 
may  judge  not  only  by  the  fact  that  he  continued  to  write 
reviews  at  intervals  throughout  his  life,  but  by  an  explicit  ref- 
erence in  his  Journal:  "  I  toiled  manfully  at  the  review  till  two 
o'clock,  commencing  at  seven.  I  fear  it  will  be  uninteresting, 
but  I  like  the  muddling  work  of  antiquities,  and  besides  wish 
to  record  my  sentiments  with  regard  to  the  Gothic  question."3 

It  is  evident  that  Scott  did  not  himself  find  the  "  muddling 
work  of  antiquities  "  dull,  because  he  realized,  emotionally  as 
well  as  intellectually,  the  life  of  past  times.  This  led  him  to 
form  broader  views  than  the  ordinary  student  constructs  out 
of  his  knowledge  of  special  facts.  An  admirable  illustration 
of  this  characteristic  occurs  in  the  essay  on  Romance,  at  the 
point  where  Scott  is  discussing  the  social  position  of  the  min- 
strels, in  the  light  of  what  Percy  and  Ritson  had  said  on  the 
subject.  He  goes  on:  "In  fact,  neither  of  these  excellent 
antiquaries  has  cast  a  general  or  philosophic  glance  on  the  nec- 
essary condition  of  a  set  of  men,  who  were  by  profession  the 
instruments  of  the  pleasure  of  others  during  a  period  of  society 

1  See  Gaston  Paris,  La  Litteraturc  Frangaise  an  Moyen  Age,  iire  partie, 
ch.  IV. 

2  Review  of  Metrical  Romances,  Edinburgh  Review,  January,  1806. 

3  Journal,  Vol.   II,  pp.   258-259. 


STUDIES  IN   THE  ROMANCES  39 

such  as  was  presented  in  the  Middle  Ages."  There  follows  a 
detailed  and  very  interesting  account  of  what  the  writer's  own 
"  philosophic  glance  "  leads  him  to  believe.    The  method  is 

useful  but  dangerous;  in  the  same  essay  occurs  an  amusing 
example  of  what  philosophy  may  do  when  it  is  given  free  rein. 
Within  two  pages  appear  these  conflicting  statements :  "  The 
Metrical  Romances,  though  in  some  instances  sent  to  the  press, 
were  not  very  fit  to  be  published  in  this  form.  The  dull  am- 
plifications, which  passed  well  enough  in  the  course  of  a  half- 
heard  recitation,  became  intolerable  when  subjected  to  the  eye." 
"  The  Metrical  Romances  in  some  instances  indeed  ran  to  great 
length,  but  were  much  exceeded  in  that  particular  by  the  folios 
which  were  written  on  the  same  or  similar  topics  by  their  prose 
successors.  Probably  the  latter  judiciously  reflected  that  a 
book  which  addresses  itself  only  to  the  eyes  may  be  laid  aside 
when  it  becomes  tiresome  to  the  reader;  whereas  it  may  not 
always  have  been  so  easy  to  stop  the  minstrel  in  the  full  career 
of  his  metrical  declamation."  Flaws  like  this  may  be  picked 
in  the  details  of  Scott's  method,  just  as  we  may  sometimes  find 
fault  with  the  lapses  in  his  mediaeval  scholarship.  We  do  him 
no  injustice  when  we  say  that  aside  from  certain  aspects  of  his 
work  on  the  ballads  and  Sir  Tristrem,  his  achievement  was  that 
of  a  popularizer  of  learning. 

But  if  he  lacked  some  of  the  authority  of  erudition,  he  escaped 
also  the  induration  of  pedantry.  In  writing  of  remote  and 
dimly  known  periods,  critics  are  perhaps  most  apt  to  show  their 
defects  of  temper,  and  Scott  often  commented  on  the  acerbity 
of  spirit  which  such  studies  seem  to  induce.  "  Antiquaries," 
he  said,  "  are  apt  to  be  both  positive  and  polemical  upon  the 
very  points  which  are  least  susceptible  of  proof,  and  which  are 
least  valuable  if  the  truth  could  be  ascertained ;  and  which 
therefore  we  would  gladly  have  seen  handled  with  more  diffi- 
dence and  better  temper  in  proportion  to  their  uncertainty."1 
Of  Ritson  he  says  many  times  in  one  form  or  another  that  his 
"  severe  accuracy  was  connected  with  an  unhappy  eagerness 
and  irritability  of  temper."  Scott  rode  his  own  hobbies  with 
an  expansive  cheerfulness  that  did  not  at  all  hinder  them  from 
being  essentially  serious. 

1  Essay  on  Romance. 


40  SCOTT   AS   A   CRITIC   OF    LITERATURE 

Other  Studies  in  Mediaeval  Literature 

Scott's  attitude  on  the  Ossianic  controversy  —  His  slight  acquaint- 
ance with  other  northern  literatures— Anglo-Saxon  scholarship  of  the 
time  —  Character  of  his  familiarity  with  Middle-English  poetry  —  His 
opinions  in  regard  to  Chaucer  —  General  importance  of  Scott's  work 
on  mediaeval  literature. 

Part  of  Scott's  critical  work  on  mediaeval  literature  falls 
outside  the  limits  of  the  two  divisions  we  have  been  consider- 
ing-— those  of  ballad  and  romance.  He  knew  comparatively 
little  about  the  early  poetry  of  the  northern  nations,  but  at  some 
points  his  knowledge  of  Scottish  literature  made  the  transition 
fairly  easy  to  the  literature  of  other  Teutonic  peoples.  But  he 
was  especially  bound  to  be  interested  in  the  Gaelic,  for  a  Scots- 
man of  his  day  could  hardly  avoid  forming  an  opinion  in  regard 
to  the  Ossianic  controversy  then  raging  with  what  Scott 
thought  must  be  its  final  violence.  He  did  not  understand  the 
Gaelic  language,1  but  he  had  a  vivid  interest  in  the  High- 
landers. The  picturesque  quality  of  their  customs  made  it  nat- 
ural enough  for  him  to  use  them  in  his  novels,  and  by  the 
"  sheer  force  of  genius,"  says  Mr.  Palgrave,  who  considers 
this  Scott's  greatest  achievement,  "  he  united  the  sympathies 
of  two  hostile  races."2 

As  early  as  1792  Scott  had  written  for  the  Speculative  So- 
ciety an  essay  on  the  authenticity  of  Ossian's  poems,  and  one 
of  his  articles  for  the  Edinburgh  Rcviczv  in  1805  was  on  the 
same  subject,  occasioned  by  a  couple  of  important  documents 
which  supported  opposite  sides,  and  which,  he  said,  set  the 
question  finally  at  issue.  This  article  represents  Scott  the 
critic  in  a  typical  attitude.  The  material  was  almost  alto- 
gether furnished  in  the  works  which  he  was  surveying.3  His 
task  was  to  distinguish  the  essential  points  of  the  problem, 

1  Familiar  Letters,  Vol.  I,  p.  46. 

2  Memoir  in  the  Globe  edition  of  Scott's  poems. 

3  Scott  adopted  the  conclusions  of  Malcolm  Laing,  who  edited  Macpher- 
son's  poems  and  adduced  parallel  passages  from  "  a  mass  of  poetry,  enough 
to  serve  any  six  gentle  readers  for  their  lifetime,"  as  the  reviewer  says. 
The  most  of  these  parallels  were  found  in  "  Homer,  Virgil,  and  their  two 
translators  ;  Milton,  Thomson,  Young,  Gray,  Mason,  Home,  and  the  Eng- 
lish Bible."  Although  he  was  convinced  by  the  argument,  Scott  saw  that 
the  editor  was  in  some  cases  misled  by  his  own  ingenuity. 


OTHER   STUDIES    IN    MEDIAEVAL   LITERATURE  II 

to  state  them  plainly,  and  to  weigh  the  evidence  on  each  side. 
In  this  he  shows  notable  clearness  of  thought,  and  also,  through- 
out the  rather  long  treatment  of  a  complicated  subject,  great 
lucidity  in  arrangement  and  statement.  I  Ie  was  led  by  this 
study  to  change  the  opinion  which  he  had  he'd  in  common  with 
most  of  his  countrymen,  and  to  adopt  the  belief  that  the  poems 
were  essentially  creations  of  Macpherson,  with  only  the  names 
and  some  parts  of  the  story  adopted  from  the  Gaelic.1  Other 
references  to  Ossian  occur  in  Scott's  writings,  and  it  is  evident 
in  this  case,  as  in  many  others,  that  an  investigation  of  the 
matter  in  his  early  career,  whether  from  original  or  from  sec- 
ondary sources,  gave  him  material  for  allusion  and  comment 
throughout  his  life.  For,  as  we  have  constant  occasion  to 
remark  in  studying  Scott,  with  a  very  definite  grasp  of  con- 
crete fact  he  combined  a  vigorous  generalizing  power,  and  all 
the  parts  of  his  knowledge  were  actively  related.  He  seems  to 
have  made  little  preparation  for  some  of  his  most  interesting 
reviews,  but  to  have  utilized  in  them  the  store  gathered  in  his 
mind  for  other  purposes. 

Of  the  northern  Teutonic  languages  Scott  had  slight  knowl- 
edge, though  he  was  always  interested  in  the  northern  litera- 
tures. In  a  review  of  the  Poems  of  William  Herbert,  of  which 
the  part  most  interesting  to  the  reviewer  consisted  of  transla- 
tions from  the  Icelandic,  Scott  says :  "  We  do  not  pretend  any 
great  knowledge  of  Norse ;  but  we  have  so  far  traced  the 
'  Runic  rhyme '  as  to  be  sensible  how  much  more  easy  it  is  to 
give  a  just  translation  of  that  poetry  into  English  than  into 
Latin."  In  the  same  review  we  find  him  saying,  after  a  slight 
discussion  of  the  style  of  Scaldic  poetry,  "  The  other  transla- 
tions are  generally  less  interesting  than  those  from  the  Ice- 
landic. There  is,  however,  one  poem  from  the  Danish,  which 
I  transcribe  as  an  instance  how  very  clearly  the  ancient  popular 
ballad  of  that  country  corresponds  with  our  own."  So  we  see 
him  drawing  from  all  sources  fuel  for  his  favorite  fire — the 
study  of  ballads.     Very  characteristically  also  Scott  suggests 

1  Later,  however  (in  the  essay  on  Imitations  of  the  Ancient  Ballad, 
1830),  he  said:  "In  their  spirit  and  diction  they  nearly  resemble  fragments 
of  poetry  extant  in  Gaelic."  By  this  time  he  was  probably  reverting  to 
the  earlier  opinion  which  had  made  the  more  vivid  impression. 


42  SCOTT  AS  A  CRITIC  OF  LITERATURE 

that  the  author  should  extend  his  researches  to  the  popular 
poetry  of  Scandinavia,  "  which  we  cannot  help  thinking  is  the 
real  source  of  many  of  the  tales  of  our  minstrels."1  It  seems 
probable  that  Scott's  acquaintance  with  northern  literatures 
came  partly  through  his  ill-fated  amanuensis,  Henry  Weber.2 
His  acknowledgement  in  the  introduction  to  Sir  Tristrem 
would  indicate  this,  taken  together  with  other  references  by 
Scott  to  Weber's  attainments. 

Scott  could  hardly  be  called  a  student  of  Anglo-Saxon,  though 
he  was  perhaps  able  to  read  the  language.  His  remarks  on 
the  subject  may,  however,  mean  simply  that  he  was  familiar 
with  early  Middle  English.3  In  his  essay  on  Romance  he  re- 
ferred to  Sharon  Turner's  account  of  the  story  of  Beowulf, 
but  called  the  poem  Caedmon,  and  made  no  correction  when 
he  added  the  later  foot-note  in  regard  to  Conybeare's  fuller 
and  more  interesting  analysis  published  in  1826.4  The  re- 
searches of  these  men  indicate  the  state  of  Anglo-Saxon  schol- 
arship in  England.  Sharon  Turner's  very  inaccurate  descrip- 
tion of  Bcoivulf  was  published  in  1805.  Danish  scholars  made 
the  first  translations  of  the  poem,  but  no  one  could  give  a  really 

1  For  the  Northern  Antiquities,  edited  by  Robert  Jamieson  and  published 
in  1814,  Scott  wrote  an  abstract  of  the  Eyrbyggja  Saga,  using,  as  one  would 
conclude  from  his  introductory  words,  the  Latin  version  made  by  Thorke- 
lin,  who  published  the  saga  in  1787.  The  purpose  of  the  publication  re- 
quired the  historical  and  antiquarian  rather  than  the  literary  point  of  view, 
and  accordingly  we  find  Scott's  notes  occupied  with  historical  comment. 

2  In  1804  Weber  came  to  Edinburgh  in  a  deplorable  condition  of  pov- 
erty, and  was  employed  and  assisted  in  literary  work  by  Scott  during  the 
following  nine  years.  In  1813  he  was  seized  with  insanity,  and  challenged 
Scott,  across  the  study  table,  to  an  immediate  duel  with  pistols.  Scott 
supported  Weber  during  the  remaining  five  years  of  his  life  in  an  insane 
hospital.  He  was  much  liked  by  the  Scott  family.  Scott  rated  his  learn- 
ing very  highly,  and  gave  him  valuable  assistance  in  various  literary 
projects.  Weber's  chief  publications  were :  Metrical  Romances  of  the 
Thirteenth,  Fourteenth,  and  Sixteenth  Centuries,  with  Introduction,  Notes 
and  Glossary  (1810)  ;  Dramatic  Works  of  John  Ford,  with  Introduction 
and  Explanatory  Notes  (1811)  ;  Works  of  Beaumont  and  Fletcher,  with 
Introduction  and  Explanatory  Notes  (1812)  :  to  this  Scott's  notes  were 
the  most  valuable  contribution ;  Illustrations  of  Northern  Antiquities 
(1814),  with  Jamieson  and  Scott. 

3  See  his  essay  on  Imitations  of  the  Ancient  Ballad. 

4  Illustrations  of  Anglo-Saxon  Poetry,  translated  by  the  Vicar  of  Bath- 
easton.     Conybeare  had  died  two  years  before  the  publication  of  the  book. 


OTHER   STUDIES    IN    MEDIAEVAL   LITERATURE  t3 

scholarly  text  or  translation  until  the  year  after  Scotl  died, 
when  the  tirst  edition  1>\  J.  M.  Kemble  appeared.  There  were 
students  of  the  language,  however,  who  weir  doing  good  work 
in  feeling  their  way  toward  a  comprehension  of  its  special  quali- 
ties. One  of  these  was  George  Ellis.  In  his  Specimens  he 
published  examples  of  Anglo-Saxon  and  Middle-English  poetry, 
and  his  information  was  helpful  in  enlarging  Scott's  outlook. 
Scott's  own  knowledge  of  Anglo-Saxon  literature  did  not 
amount  to  enough  to  be  of  importance  by  itself,  but  it  served 
perhaps  to  fortify  the  basis  of  his  generalizations  about  all  early 
poetry. 

A  review  of  the  Life  and  IVorks  of  Chattcrton  gave  Scott 
an  opportunity  to  discuss  the  characteristics  of  Middle-English 
poetry,  bnt  his  general  thesis,  that  the  Rowley  poems  exhibit 
graces  and  refinements  which  are  in  marked  contrast  to  the 
tenuity  of  idea  and  tautology  of  expression  found  in  genuine 
works  of  the  period,  is  supported  by  an  argument  which 
seems  to  be  based  on  a  characterization  of  the  romances 
rather  than  on  a  close  acquaintance  with  other  Middle- 
English  poetry.  We  notice  a  similar  quality  in  what  Scott 
says  elsewhere  concerning  Frere's  translation  into  Chau- 
cerian English  of  the  Battle  of  Brunanburgh:  "This  appears 
to  us  an  exquisite  imitation  of  the  antiquated  English  poetry, 
not  depending  on  an  accumulation  of  hard  words  like  the  lan- 
guage of  Rowley,  which  in  everything  else  is  refined  and  har- 
monious poetry,  nor  upon  an  agglomeration  of  consonants  in 
the  orthography,  the  resource  of  later  and  more  contemptible 
forgers,  but  upon  the  style  itself,  upon  its  alternate  strength 
and  weakness,  now  nervous  and  concise,  now  diffuse  and 
eked  out  by  the  feeble  aid  of  expletives.''1  Of  Middle- 
English  poets  other  than  Chaucer  and  the  author  or  trans- 
lator of  Sir  Tristran,  Laurence  Minot  was  the  one  to  whom 
Scott  alluded  most  frequently,  doubtless  because  in  Rit- 
son's  edition  of  Minot  that  poet  had  become  more  accessible 
than  most  of  his  contemporaries.  Whatever  detailed  work 
Scott  did  on  the  poetry  of  this  period  was  chiefly  in  connection 
with  Sir  Tristrcm,  which  has  naturally  been  considered  in  rela- 
tion with  his  other  studies  in  romances. 

1  Review  of  Ellis's  Specimens,  Edinburgh   Review,  April,    1804. 


44  SCOTT   AS   A   CRITIC    OF   LITERATURE 

Scott's  familiarity  with  Chaucer  appears  in  his  numerous 
quotations  from  that  poet,  but  usually  the  passages  are  cited  to 
illustrate  mediaeval  manners  rather  than  for  any  specifically 
literary  purpose.  Yet  there  are  Chaucer  enthusiasts  among  the 
characters  of  Woodstock  and  Peveril  of  the  Peak.1  Chaucer's 
fame  was  well  enough  established  so  that  Scott  seems  on  the 
whole  to  have  taken  his  merit  for  granted,  and  not  to  have  said 
much  about  it  except  in  casual  references.2  Among  general 
readers  he  must  have  been  comparatively  little  known,  however, 
notwithstanding  the  respect  paid  him  by  scholars.  In  1805 
we  find  Scott  writing  to  Ellis  that  his  scheme  for  editing  a 
collection  of  the  British  Poets  had  fallen  through,  for,  he  said, 
"  My  plan  was  greatly  too  liberal  to  stand  the  least  chance  of 
being  adopted  by  the  trade  at  large,  as  I  wished  them  to  begin 
with  Chaucer.  The  fact  is,  I  never  expected  they  would 
agree  to  it."3 

Scott's  review  of  Godwin's  Life  of  Chaucer,  one  of  the  best 
known  of  his  periodical  essays,  is  altogether  concerned  with 
the  manner  in  which  Godwin  did  his  work,  and  so  exhibits 
Scott's  ideas  on  the  subject  of  biography  and  his  methods  of 
reviewing  rather  than  his  attitude  towards  Chaucer's  poetry. 
His  most  definite  remarks  concerning  Chaucer  are  to  be  found 
in  his  comments  upon  Dryden's  Fables,  as  for  example :  "  The 
Knight's  Tale,  whether  we  consider  Chaucer's  original  poem, 
or  the  spirited  and  animated  version  of  Dryden,  is  one  of  the 
best  pieces  of  composition  in  our  language  "  ;4  "  Of  all  Chau- 
cer's multifarious  powers,  none  is  more  wonderful  than  the 

1  Bletson  and  Richard  Ganlesse. 

2  But  see  the  dictum  quoted  by  Scott  in  a  somewhat  over-emphatic  way 
from  Ellis's  Specimens  of  the  Early  English  Poets,  to  the  effect  that 
Chaucer's  "  peculiar  ornaments  of  style,  consisting  in  an  affectation  of 
splendour,  and  especially  of  latinity,"  were  perhaps  his  special  contribution 
to  the  improvement  of  English  poetry.  {Edinburgh  Review,  April,  1804.) 
Scott  said  of  Dunbar,  "  This  darling  of  the  Scottish  muses  has  been  justly 
raised  to  a  level  with  Chaucer  by  every  judge  of  poetry  to  whom  his  obso- 
lete language  has  not  rendered  him  unintelligible."  (Memoir  of  Bannatyne, 
p.  14.)  After  naming  the  various  qualities  in  which  Dunbar  was  Chaucer's 
rival,  he  pronounces  the  Scottish  poet  inferior  in  the  use  of  pathos.  The 
relative  position  here  assigned  to  the  two  poets  seems  to  be  rather  an 
exaltation  of  Dunbar  than  a  degradation  of  Chaucer. 

3Lockhart,  Vol.  I,  p.  408.  4  Dryden,  Vol.   XI,  p.   245. 


OTHER   STUDIES    IN    MEDIAEVAL    LITERATURE  46 

humour  with  which  he  touched  upon  natural  frailty,  and  the 

truth  with  which  he  describes  the  inward  feelings  of  the  human 
heart."1  Yet  he  once  called  Troilus  and  Criseyde  "a  some- 
what dull  poem."  The  Cock  and  the  Fox,  on  the  other  hand, 
he  speaks  of  as  "a  poem  which,  in  grave  ironical  narrative, 
liveliness  of  illustration,  and  happiness  of  humorous  descrip- 
tion, yields  to  none  that  ever  was  written."3 

In  estimating  the  importance  of  Scott's  studies  on  any  one 
period  we  have  to  think  of  them  as  part  of  a  greater  whole. 
The  wide  range  of  his  investigations  would  evidently  make  it 
impossible  to  expect  a  complete  treatment  of  all  the  subjects 
he  might  choose  to  discuss,  and  we  have  found,  in  fact,  that 
his  criticism  of  mediaeval  literature  led  to  systematic  results 
in  no  other  lines  than  those  of  the  ballad  and  the  romance. 
But  these  were  large  and  important  matters.  Moreover,  to  all 
that  he  wrote  in  connection  with  the  Middle  Ages  there  at- 
taches a  special  interest ;  for  with  that  work  he  made  his  real 
start  in  literature ;  and  it  reflected  the  peculiarly  delightful 
vein  in  his  own  nature  which  was  constant  from  youth  to  age, 
and  which  gave  to  his  poems  and  novels  some  of  their  most 
brilliant  qualities.4 

lDryden,  Vol.   XI,  p.   396. 

2  Ibid.,  Vol.  VI,  p.  243. 

3  Ibid.,  Vol.  XI,  p.  338. 

4  The  discussion  of  popular  superstitions  given  in  the  introduction  to 
the  Minstrelsy  and  in  the  Essay  on  Fairies,  which  is  prefixed  to  the  ballad 
of  Young  Tamlane,  suggests  comparison  with  the  Letters  on  Denwnology 
and  Witchcraft  which  Scott  wrote  in  the  year  before  he  died.  He  col- 
lected a  remarkable  library  in  regard  to  superstition,  and  thought  at  various 
times  of  making  a  book  on  the  subject,  but  the  project  was  pushed  aside 
for  other  matters  until  1831.  The  Letters  which  he  wrote  then  are  full 
of  pleasant  anecdote  and  judicious  comment,  and  though  they  lack  the  vigor 
of  his  earlier  work  they  have  remained  fairly  popular.  An  edition  of 
Kirk's  Secret  Commonwealth  of  Elves  and  Fairies,  published  in  1815,  has 
been  attributed  to  Scott.  (.See  below,  the  Bibliography  of  books  edited 
by  Scott.)  Reviews  of  his  which  have  not  been  mentioned  in  this 
chapter,  but  which  naturally  connect  themselves  with  the  subjects  here 
discussed,  are  the  following:  The  Cullodcn  Papers — an  account  of  the 
Highland  clans,  largely  narrative  {Quarterly,  January,  1816)  ;  Ritson's 
Annals  of  the  Caledonians.  Picts  and  Scots — an  article  of  more  than  forty 
pages,  discussing  the  early  history  of  Scotland  and  the  historians  who  have 
written  upon  it  {Quarterly,  July,  1829)  ;  Tytler's  History  of  Scotland — 
an  article  similar  to  that  on  Ritson's  book   {Quarterly,  November,   1829)  ; 


46  SCOTT    AS    A    CRITIC   OF   LITERATURE 

THE  DRAMA 

Scott's  fondness  for  the  drama  and  his  acquaintance  with  actors  — 
His  ideas  about  plot  structure  —  His  own  dramatic  experiments  — 
His  opinion  of  the  theaters  of  his  day  —  His  knowledge  of  English 
dramatic  literature  —  Familiarity  with  Elizabethan  plays  shown  in  his 
novels  —  His  Essay  on  the  Drama  —  Ancient  drama  —  French  drama  — 
Dramatic  unities  —  German  drama  —  Elizabethan  drama  —  Shakspere  — 
Ben  Jonson— Dryden  and  other  Restoration  dramatists— Morality 
of  theater-going  —  Character  of  Scott's  interest  in  the  drama. 

Like  most  of  his  characteristics,  Scott's  taste  for  the  theater 
was  exhibited  in  his  childhood.  We  find  him  reverting,  in  a 
review  written  in  1826,1  to  his  rapturous  emotions  on  the  occa- 
sion of  seeing  his  first  play ;  and  in  the  private  theatricals 
which  he  and  his  brothers  and  sister  performed  in  the  family 
dining-room  he  was  always  the  manager.  In  18 10  he  was  ac- 
tive in  helping  to  bring  out  in  Edinburgh  the  Family  Legend  of 
his  friend  Joanna  Baillie.2  One  of  the  actors  on  that  occasion 
was  Daniel  Terry,3  who  became  an  intimate  friend  of  Scott's. 
For  Terry  Scott  wrote  The  Doom  of  Devorgoil,  but  the  piece 

Pitcairn's  Ancient  Criminal  Trials — a  long  article,  which  begins  with  an 
extended  digression  on  booksellers  and  collectors  and  on  the  Roxburghe 
and  Bannatyne  clubs  {Quarterly,  February,  1831)  ;  Sibbald's  Chronicle  of 
Scottish  Poetry — merely  a  series  of  notes  on  special  points  (Edinburgh 
Reviczv,  October,  1803)  ;  Southey's  Chronicle  of  the  Cid  (Quarterly,  Feb- 
ruary, 1809).  For  the  Encyclopaedia  Britannica  Scott  wrote  an  essay  on 
Chivalry,  as  well  as  the  one  on  Romance  to  which  reference  has  been 
made. 

1  Review  of  Kelly's  Reminiscences  and  the  Life  of  Kemble,  Quarterly 
Review,  June,  1826. 

2  Lockhart,  Vol.  II,  p.  97. 

3  Terry  had  been  educated  as  an  architect,  and  his  knowledge  and  taste 
were  of  assistance  to  Scott  in  connection  with  the  building  and  furnishing 
of  Abbotsford.  After  1812  he  played  chiefly  in  London.  In  1816  his  ver- 
sion of  Guy  Mannering,  the  first  of  his  adaptations  from  Scott,  was  pre- 
sented. Before  this  he  had  taken  the  part  of  Roderick  Dhu  in  two  dra- 
matic versions  of  The  Lady  of  the  Lake.  In  1819  he  was  the  first  David 
Deans  in  his  adaptation  of  The  Heart  of  Midlothian.  Six  years  later  he 
became  manager  of  the  Adelphi  theater,  in  association  with  F.  H.  Yates. 
At  this  time  Scott  became  Terry's  security  for  £1280,  a  sum  which  he 
was  afterward  obliged  to  pay  with  the  addition  of  £  500  for  which  the 
credit  of  James  Ballantyne  was  pledged.  When  financial  embarrassment 
caused  Terry  to  retire  from  the  management  his  mental  and  physical  pow- 
ers gave  way,  and  he  died  of  paralysis  in  1829.  Terry  admired  Scott  so 
much  that  he  learned  to  imitate  his  facial  expression,  his  speech  and  his 
handwriting. 


TIIK    DRAMA  47 

was  not  found  suitable  for  presentation.    Several  of  the  novels 

were  more  successfully  dramatized  by  the  same  friend,  so  that 
we  find  the  "Author"  humorously  complaining  in  the  "Intro- 
ductory Epistle"  to  The  Fortunes  of  Nigel,  "I  believe  my 
muse  would  be  '/Vrrvlied  into  treading  the  stage  even  if  I 
should  write  a  sermon."  Among  Scott's  friends  were  several 
other  actors,  particularly  Mrs.  Siddons  and  her  brother  John 
Kemble,  and  the  comedian  Charles  Mathews.  In  Scott's  re- 
view of  Kelly's  Reminiscences  and  the  Life  of  Kemble  we  find 
recorded  many  of  the  discriminations  he  was  fond  of  making 
in  regard  to  the  talents  of  particular  actors. 

In  his  childhood  Scott  felt  well  qualified  to  take  the  part 
of  Richard  III.,  for  he  considered  that  his  limp  "  would  do 
well  enough  to  represent  the  hump."1  After  a  similar  fashion 
we  find  him  commenting  on  the  improbabilities  of  the  tragedy 
of  Douglas:  "  But  the  spectator  should,  and  indeed  must,  make 
considerable  allowances  if  he  expects  to  receive  pleasure  from 
the  drama.  He  must  get  his  mind,  according  to  Tony  Lump- 
kin's phrase,  into  '  a  concatenation  accordingly,'2  since  he  can- 
not reasonably  expect  that  scenes  of  deep  and  complicated 
interest  shall  be  placed  before  him,  in  close  succession,  without 
some  force  being  put  upon  ordinary  probability ;  and  the  ques- 
tion is  not,  how  far  you  have  sacrificed  your  judgment  in  order 
to  accommodate  the  fiction,  but  rather,  what  is  the  degree  of 
delight  you  have  received  in  return."3 

Scott  disclaimed  any  special  knowledge  of  stage-craft.  "  I 
know  as  little  about  the  division  of  a  drama  as  the  spinster 
about  the  division  of  a  battle,  to  use  Iago's  simile,"4  he  once 
wrote  to  a  friend.  Yet  as  a  critic  he  had  of  course  some  gen- 
eral ideas  about  the  making  of  plays,  without  having  worked 
out  any  subtle  theories  on  the  subject.  In  criticising  a  play  by 
Allan  Cunningham,  who  had  asked  for  his  judgment  on  it, 

1  Lockhart,  Vol.  I,  p.  94. 

2  The  phrase,  which  was  a  favorite  one  of  Scott's,  is  spoken  not  by 
Tony  Lumpkin,  but  by  one  of  his  tavern  companions.  Scott's  use  of  it 
is  an  indication  of  the  way  in  which  he  was  familiar  with  the  drama. 
Very  likely  he  never  reread  the  play  after  his  youth,  but  his  strong  memory 
doubtless  retained  a  pretty  definite  impression  of  it. 

3  Review  of  the  Life  and  Works  of  John  Home,  Quarterly,  June,  18^7. 
*  Familiar  Letters.  Vol.  II,  p.   143. 


48  SCOTT   AS    A    CRITIC    OF    LITERATURE 

he  remarked  first  that  the  plot  was  ill-combined.  "  If  the 
mind  can  be  kept  upon  one  unbroken  course  of  interest,  the 
effect  even  in  perusal  is  more  gratifying.  I  have  always  con- 
sidered this  as  the  great  secret  in  dramatic  poetry,  and  con- 
ceive it  one  of  the  most  difficult  exercises  of  the  invention  pos- 
sible, to  conduct  a  story  through  five  acts,  developing  it  grad- 
ually in  every  scene,  so  as  to  keep  up  the  attention,  yet  never 
till  the  very  conclusion  permitting  the  nature  of  the  catastrophe 
to.  become  visible, — and  all  the  while  to  accompany  this  by  the 
necessary  delineation  of  character  and  beauty  of  language."1 
And  again  he  said  to  the  same  person,  "  I  hope  you  will  make 
another  dramatic  attempt ;  and  in  that  case  I  would  strongly 
recommend  that  you  should  previously  make  a  model  or  skele- 
ton of  your  incidents,  dividing  them  regularly  into  scenes  and 
acts,  so  as  to  insure  the  dependence  of  one  circumstance  upon 
another,  and  the  simplicity  and  union  of  your  whole  story."2 
Here  we  find  Scott  giving  advice  which  by  his  own  admission 
he  was  not  himself  able  to  follow  in  the  composition  of  fiction. 
"  I  never  could  lay  down  a  plan,  or  having  laid  it  down  I  never 
could  adhere  to  it,"  he  wrote  in  his  journal.3  And  the  "  Au- 
thor "  in  the  introductory  epistle  to  Nigel  remarks,  "  It  may 
pass  for  one  good  reason  for  not  writing  a  play,  that  I  cannot 
form  a  plot." 

The  few  experiments  that  he  made  he  did  not  seem  to  regard 
seriously  at  any  time,  though  he  was  rather  favorably  im- 
pressed on  rereading  the  Doom  of  Devorgoil  after  it  had  lain 
unused  for  several  years.4  Of  Halidon  Hill  he  said,  "  It  is 
designed  to  illustrate  military  antiquities  and  the  manners  of 
chivalry.  The  drama  (if  it  can  be  called  one)  is  in  no  par- 
ticular either  designed  or  calculated  for  the  stage."5    He  seems 

1  Lockhart,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  427.  It  may  be  noted  that  this  criticism  does 
not  show  much  dramatic  insight. 

2  Lockhart,  Vol.   Ill,  pp.  445-6. 

3  Journal,  Vol.  I,  p.   117;  Lockhart,  Vol.  IV,  p.  447. 

4  Journal,  Vol.  I,  p.  94;  Lockhart,  Vol.  IV,  p.  419. 

5  Advertisement  to  Halidon  Hill.  When  the  publisher  Cadell  closed  a 
bargain  with  Scott  in  five  minutes  for  Halidon  Hill,  giving  him  £1000,  he 
wrote  as  follows  to  his  partner :  "  My  views  were  these :  here  is  a  com- 
mencement of  a  series  of  dramatic  writings — let  us  begin  by  buying  them 
out."     {Constable's  Correspondence,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  217.) 


THE   DRAMA  49 

to  have  been  "often  urged"  to  write  plays-,  if  one  may  trust 
Captain  Clutterbuck's  authority,  and  the  effectiveness  of  the 
many  poetical  mottoes  improvised  by  the  Author  of  Wavcrley 
for  the  chapters  of  his  novels,  and  subscribed  "  Old  Play,"  1 
was  naturally  used  as  an  argument.8  Scott's  own  judgment 
on  the  matter  was  expressed  thus :  "  Nothing  so  easy  when 
you  are  full  of  an  author,  as  to  write  a  few  lines  in  his  taste 
and  style ;  the  difficulty  is  to  keep  it  up.  Besides,  the  greatest 
success  would  be  but  a  spiritless  imitation,  or,  at  best,  what 
the  Italians  call  a  ccntouc  [sic]  from  Shakspeare."3  When 
Elliston  became  manager  of  Drury  Lane  in  1819  he  applied  to 
Scott  for  plays,  but  without  effect.1  Scott  seems  never  to 
have  felt  any  concern  over  the  fact  that  the  dramatized  ver- 
sions of  his  novels  were  often  very  poor,  but  Hazlitt  wished 
that  he  would  "  not  leave  it  to  others  to  mar  what  he  has 
sketched  so  admirably  as  a  ground-work,"  for  he  saw  no  good 
reason  why  the  author  of  Waverley  could  not  write  "  a  first- 
rate  tragedy  as  well  as  so  many  first-rate  novels."5 

Scott  felt  that  to  write  for  the  stage  in  his  day  was 
a  thankless  and  almost  degrading  occupation.  "  Avowedly 
I  will  never  write  for  the  stage  ;  if  I  do,  '  call  me  horse.'  " 
he  said  in  a  letter  to  Terry.6  Again  in  a  letter  to  Southey: 
"  I  do  not  think  the  character  of  the  audience  in  London  is 
such  that  one  could  have  the  least  pleasure  in  pleasing  them. 
.  .  .  On  the  whole,  I  would  far  rather  write  verses  for  mine 
honest  friend  Punch  and  his  audience";7  and  to  a  would-be 
tragedian  he  said :  "  In  the  present  day  there  is  only  one  reason 
which  seems  to  me  adequate  for  the  encountering  the  plague 
of  trying  to  please  a  set  of  conceited  performers  and  a  very 
motley  audience, — I  mean  the  want  of  money."s  This  de- 
graded condition  of  the  London  stage  Scott  thought  to  be  a 
consequence   of    limiting   the    number    of    theaters.     We    can 

1  "  That  well-written,  but  very  didactic  '  Old  Play  ',"  as  Adolphus  calls 
it.     (Letters  to  Hebcr,  p.  55.) 

2  Introductory  epistle  to  Nigel.  3  Lockhart,  Vol.  V,  p.  414. 

4  Fitzgerald's  Neiv  History  of  the  English  Stage,  Vol.  II,  p.  404. 

5  Dramatic  Essays,  Hazlitt's  Works,  Vol.  VIII,  p.  422. 

6  Lockhart,  Vol.  Ill,  p.   176.  "  Ibid.,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  265. 
*Ibid.,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  332. 

4 


50  SCOTT   AS   A   CRITIC   OF   LITERATURE 

hardly  suppose,  however,  that  he  was  pessimistic  in  regard 
to  the  written  drama  of  his  day,  when  he  could  say  of 
Byron,  "  There  is  one  who,  to  judge  from  the  dramatic  sketch 
he  has  given  us  in  Manfred,  must  be  considered  as  a  match 
for  Aeschylus,  even  in  his  sublimest  moods  of  horror  "  ;l  or 
when  he  could  place  Joanna  Baillie  in  the  same  class  with 
Shakspere.2 

Scott  probably  did  much  reading  in  the  drama  in  his  early 
life.  We  know  that  by  1804  he  had  "  long  since  "  annotated 
his  copy  of  Beaumont  and  Fletcher  sufficiently  so  that  he 
wished  to  offer  it  to  Gifford,  who,  Scott  erroneously  under- 
stood, was  about  to  edit  their  dramas.3  The  edition  of 
Dryden,  published  in  1808,  shows  familiarity  with  Elizabethan 
as  well  as  Restoration  dramatists.  He  seems  to  have  had  first- 
hand knowledge  of  such  men  as  Ford,  Webster,  Marston, 
Brome,  Shirley,  Chapman,  and  Dekker,  whom  he  mentions  as 
being  "  little  known  to  the  general  readers  of  the  present  day, 
even  by  name."4     But  1808  was  the  very  year  in  which  ap- 

1  Essay  on  the  Drama. 

2  In  1808  he  wrote  to  a  friend:  "We  have  Miss  Baillie  here  at  present, 
who  is  certainly  the  best  dramatic  writer  whom  Britain  has  produced  since 
the  days  of  Shakspeare  and  Massinger."  (Fam.  Let.,  Vol.  I,  p.  99.)  But 
Wilson  also  put  Joanna  Baillie  next  to  Shakspere,  and  quite  seriously. 
The  article  in  the  Dictionary  of  National  Biography  on  Joanna  Baillie  says 
that  when  the  first  volume  of  Plays  on  the  Passions  was  published  anony- 
mously in  1798,  Walter  Scott  was  at  first  suspected  of  being  the  author. 
But  as  Scott  had  done  nothing  to  give  him  a  literary  reputation  in  1798, 
the  assertion  is  incredible.  It  seems  to  be  based  on  the  following  very 
inexact  statement  in  Chambers's  Biographical  Dictionary  of  Eminent  Scots- 
men. (Vol.  V,  Art.  Joanna  Baillie.)  "  Rich  though  the  period  was  in 
poetry,  this  work  made  a  great  impression,  and  a  new  edition  of  it  was 
soon  required.  The  writer  was  sought  for  among  the  most  gifted  person- 
ages of  the  day,  and  the  illustrious  Scott,  with  others  then  equally  appre- 
ciated, was  suspected  as  the  author." 

3Lockhart,  Vol.  I,  p.  380. 

4Life  of  Dryden,  ch.  I.  In  Guy  Mannering  and  The  Antiquary,  the  first 
two  novels  in  which  Scott  habitually  used  mottoes  to  head  his  chapters, 
most  of  the  selections  are  from  plays.  Eighteen  plays  of  Shakspere  are 
represented  by  twenty-nine  quotations.  Other  mottoes  are  from  The  Merry 
Devil  of  Edmonton,  from  Jonson,  from  Fletcher  (The  Little  French  Law- 
yer, Women  Pleased,  The  Fair  Maid  of  the  Inn,  The  Beggar's  Bush),  from 
Brome,  Dekker,  Middleton  and  Rowley,  Cartwright,  Otway,  Southerne, 
The  Beggar's  Opera,  Walpole's  Mysterious  Mother,  The  Critic,  Chronon- 
hotonthologos,  Joanna  Baillie.     For  the  latter  part  of  The  Antiquary  many 


THE   DRAMA  51 

peared  Lamb's  Specimens  of  English  Dramatic  Poets  and  I  i 

ridge's  first  course  of  lectures  on  Shakspere.  The  old  drama- 
tists were  beginning  to  come  to  their  own,  through  the  sympa- 
thetic appreciation  of  the  Romantic  critics.  Scott  never  refers, 
however,  to  the  work  of  Lamb,  Coleridge,  or  Hazlitt1  in  this 
field,  and  we  conclude  that  his  researches  in  dramatic  literature 
were  the  recreation  of  a  man  who  realized  that  his  business  lay 
in  another  direction.  But  in  preparing  the  Dryden,  he  doubt- 
less read  more  widely  in  Restoration  drama  than  he  would 
otherwise  have  done.  Throughout  his  life  he  continued  to 
read  plays  at  intervals,  as  we  know  from  occasional  refer- 
ences in  the  Journal;  but  after  the  Dryden  appeared  we  can 
point  to  no  time  in  his  career  when  such  reading  was  his  espe- 
cial occupation.  His  familiarity  with  Elizabethan  drama  he 
showed  even  more  emphatically  than  by  serious  critical  writ- 
ings on  the  subject,  in  his  fragments  from  mythical  "  Old 
Plays,"  -  in  his  frequent  references  to  single  plays,  and 
in  the  substance  of  some  of  the  novels,  particularly  The 
Fortunes  of  Nigel  and  Woodstock,  which  make  use  of  settings, 
situations,  and  characterizations  suggested  by  the  drama.3 
Mr.  Lang  says  of  The  Fortunes  of  Nigel,  "  The  scenes  in 
Alsatia  are  a  distinct  gain  to  literature,  a  pearl  rescued  from 
the  unread  mass  of  Shadwell."4 

of  the  mottoes  were  composed  by  Scott  himself.  Kenilworth  presents  a 
similar  list,  with  some  variations :  Jonson's  Masque  of  Owls  was  used, 
more  than  one  play  by  Beaumont  and  Fletcher,  Waldron's  Virgin  Queen, 
Wallenstein,  and  Douglas.  In  St.  Roman's  Well  there  is  a  larger  propor- 
tion of  non-dramatic  mottoes,  as  in  most  of  the  later  novels,  but  we  find 
represented  nine  of  Shakspere's  plays  and  one  of  Beaumont  and  Fletcher's. 
The  Legend  of  Montrose  (chapter  XIV)  has  a  motto  from  Suckling's  Bren- 
noralt.  In  Anne  of  Geierstein  ten  of  Shakspere's  plays  were  drawn  upon, 
and  Manfred  was  twice  used.  Scott  made  his  chapters  much  longer  in 
these  later  novels,  and  used  fewer  mottoes,  but  the  evidence  of  the  selec- 
tions would  seem  to  indicate  that  he  had  lost  something  of  his  early 
familiarity  with  dramatic  literature. 

1  Hazlitt's  Characters  of  Shakespeare's  Plays  appeared  in  1817;  his  Lec- 
tures on   the  Dramatic  Literature  of  the  Age  of  Queen  Elizabeth   in    1821. 

2  Scott  first  began  to  fabricate  occasional  mottoes  for  his  chapters  dur- 
ing the  composition  of  The  Antiquary  in  1816. 

3  Saintsbury  in  Macmillan's  Magazine,  lxx  :   323.     Scott's  style  in  many 
passages  is  strongly  colored  by  the  influence  of  Shakspere. 

4  Introduction  by  Lang  to  The  Fortunes  of  Nigel. 


52  SCOTT   AS   A    CRITIC    OF   LITERATURE 

His  serious  critical  writings  on  the  subject  comprise  little 
else  than  his  Essay  on  the  Drama,  which  appeared  in  the  sup- 
plement to  the  Encyclopedia  Britannica,  published  in  1819,  and 
the  discussions  given  in  connection  with  Dryden's  plays.1 
Although  the  Essay  was  written  ten  years  later  than  the 
Dry  den,  we  have  no  reason  to  think  that  Scott  changed  his 

1  It  is  possible  that  among  the  various  jobs  of  editing  undertaken  by 
Scott  with  a  view  to  keeping  the  Ballantyne  types  busy,  were  certain  col- 
lections of  dramas.  Ancient  British  Drama,  in  three  volumes,  and  Modem 
British  Drama,  in  five  volumes,  published  in  1810  and  181 1,  are  sometimes 
attributed  to  Scott  in  library  catalogues,  but  on  what  authority  it  seems 
impossible  to  discover.  There  is  almost  no  commentary  in  the  Ancient 
British  Drama,  but  the  Modern  British  Drama  contains  three  brief  intro- 
ductions which  I  believe  were  written  by  Scott.  They  show  a  striking 
likeness  to  some  parts  of  the  Essay  on  the  Drama  written  several  years 
later,  and  it  is  not  probable  that  Scott  took  his  criticism  ready-made  from 
another  author.  In  the  preface  to  the  Ancient  British  Drama  we  find  this 
statement :  "  The  present  publication  is  intended  to  form,  with  The  British 
Drama  and  Shakspeare,  a  complete  and  uniform  collection  in  ten  volumes 
of  the  best  English  plays."  The  Shakspeare  here  referred  to  is  doubtless 
that  of  which  Constable  the  publisher  afterwards  spoke  in  his  correspond- 
ence with  Scott  as  "  Ballantyne's  Shakespeare,"  and  Scott  had  no  hand  in 
the  editorship.     (Constable's  Correspondence,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  244.) 

It  is  true,  however,  as  R.  S.  Mackenzie  says  in  his  Life  of  Scott,  that 
Scott  "  had  not  only  meditated,  but  partly  executed  an  edition  of  Shakes- 
peare." The  work  was  suggested  by  Constable  in  1822,  was  begun  in  1823 
or  1824,  and  three  volumes  of  the  proposed  ten  were  printed  by  the  time 
of  Constable's  financial  crash  in  the  beginning  of  1826.  The  project  was 
sometime  afterwards  abandoned,  and  the  printed  sheets,  which  apparently 
were  not  bound  up,  disappeared  from  view.  The  first  volume  was  to  be 
a  life  of  Shakspere  by  Scott,  and  this  was  probably  not  begun  at  all.  Of 
the  commentary  in  the  other  volumes,  Scott  was  to  have  the  oversight 
but  Lockhart  was  to  do  most  of  the  work.  It  was  not  designed  that  the 
critical  apparatus  should  to  any  great  degree  represent  original  ideas  fur- 
nished by  Lockhart  or  Scott,  but  the  book  was  to  be  "  a  sensible  Shakes- 
peare, in  which  the  useful  and  readable  notes  should  be  condensed  and 
separated  from  the  trash."  (See  the  discussion  of  the  matter  in  letters 
between  Scott  and  his  publisher  given  in  the  third  volume  of  Constable's 
Correspondence.  See  also  Lang's  Life  of  Lockhart,  Vol.  I,  p.  409,  and 
Vol.  II,  p.  13,  and  Mackenzie's  Life  of  Scott,  pp.  475-6.)  The  Boston 
Public  Library  contains  three  volumes  which  are  thought  to  be  a  unique 
copy  of  so  much  of  the  Scott-Lockhart  Shakspere  as  was  printed.  (See 
below,  the  Bibliography  of  books  edited  by  Scott.) 

Scott's  notes  on  Beaumont  and  Fletcher,  which  he  had  wished  in  1804 
to  offer  to  Gifford,  were  actually  used  by  Weber  in  his  Beaumont  and 
Fletcher,  published  about  181  o,  an  edition  which  was  characterized  by 
Scott  as  "  too  carelessly  done  to  be  reputable."  (Lockhart,  Vol.  IV,  p. 
472.) 


THE   DRAMA  53 

views  or  added  greatly  to  his  knowledge  in  the  interval,  and 
using  these  two  sources  we  may  discuss  his  account  of  the 
drama  in  general  without  regard  to  the  particular  date  at 
which  his  opinions  were  expressed. 

His  exposition  in  the  Essay  on  the  Drama  rested  on  the 
basis  furnished  by  a  historical  study  of  the  stage.  He  did  not, 
of  course,  pretend  to  have  formed  his  own  conclusions  on  all 
points,  and  we  find  him  quoting  from  various  authorities,  some- 
times naming  them  and  sometimes  only  indicating,  perhaps, 
that  he  was  "  abridging  from  the  best  antiquaries."  This, 
however,  was  chiefly  in  connection  with  the  ancient  drama.  As 
I  have  already  remarked,  we  do  not  find  him  referring  to 
recent  studies  on  the  English  drama.  And  though  Scott  had 
forgotten  all  his  Greek  we  observe  that  he  is  bold  enough  to 
disagree  with  "  the  ingenious  Schlegel  "  in  regard  to  the  com- 
parative value  of  the  Greek  New  Comedy.  In  his  treatment 
of  the  ancient  drama  the  main  point  for  note  is  the  success 
with  which  he  gives  a  broad  and  connected  view  of  the  sub- 
ject. His  account  of  the  drama  in  France  needs  correction 
in  certain  respects,1  but  it  seems  to  indicate  some  first-hand 
knowledge  and  very  definite  opinions.  He  quotes  Moliere  fre- 
quently throughout  his  writings,  and  always  speaks  of  him 
with  admiration ;  but  with  no  other  French  dramatist  does  he 
seem  to  have  been  familiar  to  such  a  degree.  Judging  French 
tragic  poets  too  much  from  the  Shaksperian  point  of  view,  he 
was  not  prepared  to  do  them  justice.2  On  the  dramatic  unities, 
of  which  he  remarked,  "  Aristotle  says  so  little  and  his  com- 
mentators and  followers  talk  so  much,"  Scott  wrote,  here  and 
elsewhere,  with  decision  and  vivacity.  The  unities  of  time  and 
place  he  calls  "  fopperies,"  though  time  and  place,  he  admits, 
are  not  to  be  lightly  changed.3  He  connects  the  whole  discus- 
sion with  the  study  of  theatrical  conditions,  and  never  bows 

1  He  seems  to  have  connected  heroic  plays  too  closely  with  "  the  romances 
of  Calprenede  and  Scuderi."  See  his  introduction  to  The  Indian  Emperor, 
Dryden,  Vol.  II,  pp.  317-20;  also  Vol.  I,  p.  56,  and  Vol.  VI,  p.  125.  On 
his  opinion  in  regard  to  the  relation  between  novels  and  plays  see  below, 
PP.    75-6. 

2  See  his  comment  on  Corneille's  Ocdipe,  Dryden,  Vol.  VI,  p.  125,  and 
Mr.  Saintsbury's  note. 

3Lockhart,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  446. 


54  SCOTT   AS    A    CRITIC   OF   LITERATURE 

down  to  authority  as  such.  He  says,  "  Surely  it  is  of  less 
consequence  merely. to  ascertain  what  was  the  practice  of  the 
ancients,  than  to  consider  how  far  such  practice  is  founded 
upon  truth,  good  taste,  and  general  effect  "  ;  and  again,  "  Aris- 
totle would  probably  have  formulated  different  rules  if  he  had 
written  in  our  time."  And  though  he  adopted  and  applied 
to  the  drama  the  Horatian  dictum  that  the  end  of  poetry  is  to 
instruct  and  delight,  it  was  not  because  Horace  and  a  long  line  of 
critics  had  said  it,  but  because  he  thought  it  was  true.  Doubtless 
his  phrase  would  have  been  different  if  he  had  not  taken  what 
was  lying  nearest,  but  his  habit  was  never  carefully  to  avoid 
the  common  phrase.  His  general  opinion  of  French  drama 
was  decidedly  unfavorable,  and  he  thought  it  was  doubtful 
whether  their  plays  would  ever  be  any  nearer  to  nature.  "  That 
nation,"  he  observes  calmly,  "  is  so  unfortunate  as  to  have  no 
poetical .  language." 

His  remarks  on  German  drama  are  general  in  character, 
though  we  know  that  in  his  early  days  he  was  much  interested 
in  translating  contemporary  German  plays.  His  version  of 
Goethe's  Goetz  von  Berlichingen  was  the  most  important  of 
these  translations.  A  letter  of  Scott's  contains  the  following 
reference  to  this  play  :x  "  The  publication  of  Goetz  was  a  great 
era  ...  in  German  literature,  and  served  completely  to  free 
them  from  the  French  follies  of  unities  and  decencies  of  the 
scene,  and  gave  an  impulse  to  their  dramas  which  was  unique 
of  its  kind.  Since  that,  they  have  been  often  stark  mad  but 
never,  I  think,  stupid.  They  either  divert  you  by  taking  the 
most  brilliant  leaps  through  the  hoop,  or  else  by  tumbling  into 
the  custard,  as  the  newspapers  averred  the  Champion  did  at 
the  Lord  Mayor's  dinner," 

When  he  is  on  English  ground  we  can  best  trace  Scott's 
individual  opinions,  yet  even  here  he  reflects  some  of  the  limi- 
tations of  the  less  enlightened  scholarship  of  his  time,  espe- 
cially in  connection  with  early  Elizabethan  writers.  He  passes 
from  Ferrex  and  Porrex2  and  Gammer  Garton's  Needle  di- 

1  Hutchinson's  Letters  of  Scott,  p.  224. 

2  That  Scott  admired  Sackville  greatly  is  evident  from  more  than  one 
comment.     Of  Ferrex  and  Porrex  he  says,  "  In  Sackville's  part  of  the  play, 


THE    DRAMA  -V> 

rectly  to  Shakspere,  and  quite  omits  Marlowe  and  the  other 
immediate  predecessors.  He  was  not  ignorant  of  their  exist- 
ence, for  against  a  statement  of  Dryden's  that  Shakspere  was 
the  first  to  use  blank  verse  we  find  in  Scott's  edition  the  note, — 
"  This  is  a  mistake.  Marlowe  and  several  other  dramatic 
authors  used  blank  verse  before  the  days  of  Shakespeare  " ;' 
and  one  of  his  youthful  notebooks  contains  this  comment  on 
Faustus:  "  A  very  remarkable  thing.  Grand  subject — end 
grand."2  In  183 1  Scott  intended  to  write  an  article  for  the 
Quarterly  Review  on  Peele,  Greene,  and  Webster,  and  in  asking 
Alexander  Dyce  to  have  Webster's  works  sent  to  him  he  said, 
"  Marlowe  and  others  I  have, — and  some  acquaintance  with 
the  subject,  though  not  much."3  Webster  he  considered  "  one 
of  the  best  of  our  ancient  dramatists."  The  proposed  article 
was  never  written,  because  of  Scott's  final  illness. 

In  spite  of  his  statement  that  "  the  English  stage  might  be 
considered  equally  without  rule  and  without  model  when 
Shakspeare  arose,"  Scott  did  not  seem  inclined  to  leave  the 
great  man  altogether  unaccounted  for,  as  some  critics  have 
preferred  to  do,  for  he  says,  "  The  effect  of  the  genius  of  an 
individual  upon  the  taste  of  a  nation  is  mighty ;  but  that  genius 
in  its  turn  is  formed  according  to  the  opinions  prevalent  at  the 
period  when  it  comes  into  existence."  These  opinions,  how- 
ever, Scott  assigns  very  vaguely  to  the  influence  of  "  a  nameless 
crowd  of  obscure  writers,"  and  thinks  it  fortunate  that  Shaks- 
pere was  unacquainted  with  classical  rules.  The  critic  had  evi- 
dently made  no  attempt  to  define  the  influence  of  particular 
writers  upon  Shakspere.  His  criticism  is  at  some  points  purely 
conventional,  as  for  instance  when  he  calls  the  poet  "  that  pow- 
erful magician,  whose  art  could  fascinate  us  even  by  means  of 
deformity  itself  " ;  but  on  the  whole  Scott  seems  to  write  about 
Shakspere  in  a  very  reasonable  and  discriminating  way. 

which  comprehends  the  two  last  acts,  there  is  some  poetry  worthy  of  the 
author  of  the  sublime  Induction  to  the  Mirror  of  Magistrates."  (Drydcn, 
Vol.  II,  p.  135.)  Elsewhere  Scott  calls  Sackville  "a  beautiful  poet." 
(Fragmenta  Regalia,  p.  277.  Secret  History  of  the  Court  of  James  I.,  Vol. 
I,  p.  278,  note.) 

1  Dryden,  Vol.  II,  p.   136. 

2  Lockhart,  Vol.  I,  p.  229.     See  also  Vol.  Ill,  p.  223. 
'Ibid.,   Vol.   V,   p.   322. 


56  SCOTT  AS  A  CRITIC  OF  LITERATURE 

He  has  a  good  deal  to  say  of  Ben  Jonson,  in  other  places  as 
well  as  in  this  Essay  on  the  Drama.1  He  was  evidently  well 
acquainted  with  that  poet,  and  admired  him  without  liking 
him.  Somewhere  he  calls  him  "  the  dry  and  dogged  Jonson,"2 
and  again  he  speaks  of  his  genius  in  very  high  terms.  The 
contrast  between  Shakspere  and  Jonson  moved  him  even  to 
epigram  :3  "  In  reading  Shakespeare  we  often  meet  passages  so 
congenial  to  our  nature  and  feelings  that,  beautiful  as  they 
are,  we  can  hardly  help  wondering  they  did  not  occur  to  our- 
selves ;  in  studying  Jonson,  we  have  often  to  marvel  how  his 
conceptions  could  have  occurred  to  any  human  being."  It  was 
characteristic  of  Scott  to  note  the  fact  that  Shakspere  wrote 
rapidly,  Jonson  slowly,  for  he  was  fond  of  getting  support  for 
his  theory  that  rapid  writing  is  the  better. 

As  early  as  1804  Scott  referred  to  The  Changeling  as  "an 
old  play  which  contains  some  passages  horribly  striking,"4  and 
in  so  doing  voiced,  as  Mr.  Swinburne  says,  "  the  first  word  of 
modern  tribute  to  the  tragic  genius  of  Thomas  Middleton."5 
Scott  also  praised  Massinger  highly,  especially  for  his  strength 
in  characterization,  and  once  called  him  "  the  most  gentleman- 
like of  all  the  old  English  dramatists."6  He  discussed  Beau- 
mont and  Fletcher  sympathetically,  for  he  knew  them  well  and 
frequently  quoted  from  them.  He  named  Shirley,  Ford,  Web- 
ster, and  Dekker  in  a  group,  and  spoke  of  the  singular  profu- 
sion of  talents  devoted  in  this  period  to  the  writing  of  plays, 
an  observation  which  is  made  more  explicitly  later  in  the 
Journal,  when  he  has  just  been  reading  an  old  play  which,  he 
says,  "  worthless  in  the  extreme,  is,  like  many  of  the  plays  in 
the  beginning  of  the  seventeenth  century,  written  to  a  good 
tune.  The  dramatic  poets  of  that  time  seem  to  have  possessed 
as  joint-stock  a  highly  poetical  and  abstract  tone  of  language, 
so  that  the  worst  of  them  often  remind  you  of  the  very  best."7 

1  See,  for  example,  Haivthornden,  in  Provincial  Antiquities. 

2  Dry  den,  Vol.  XV,  p.  337.  3  Ibid.,  Vol.  I,  p.  10. 

4  Note  on  Sir  Tristrem,  Fytte  II.,  stanza  56. 

5  See  Middleton's  Plays  in  the  Mermaid  edition :  Introduction,  Vol.  I, 
pp.  viii-ix. 

6  Ticknor,  in  Allibone's  Dictionary,  Vol.  II,  p.    1968. 

7  Journal,  Vol.  I,  p.  234 ;  Lockhart,  Vol.  V,  p.  23. 


THE   DRAMA  57 

This  circumstance  he  accounts  fur  by  a  reference  to  the  au- 
diences, and  this  ill  turn  he  seems  to  ascribe  partly  to  the 
great  number  of  theaters  then  open  in  London.  He  dwells  so 
much  on  the  evils  of  limiting  the  number  of  play-houses  to 
two  or  three,  that  we  may  fairly  consider  it  one  of  his  hobbies, 
and  it  is  possible  that  he  had  some  slight  inilucnce  toward 
increasing  that  public  opposition  to  the  theatrical  monopoly 
which  finally,  in  1843,  resulted  in  the  nullification  of  the 
patents. 

Scott's  discussion  of  Restoration  drama  is  admirably  vigor- 
ous and  clear.  He  probably  simplified  the  matter  too  much  at 
some  points,  indeed,  as  for  example  in  over-estimating  the 
influence  exerted  upon  the  stage  by  Charles  II.  and  his  French 
tastes,  and  in  tracing  the  origin  of  the  French  drama  to  ro- 
mances. But  in  general  his  facts  are  right  and  his  deductions 
fair.  Mr.  Saintsbury  has  accused  him  of  depreciating  Dryden's 
plays,  especially  the  comedies,  out  of  disgust  at  their  indecency  ; 
yet  in  judging  the  period  as  a  whole  he  seems  to  discriminate 
sufficiently  between  indelicacy  and  dulness.  "  The  talents  of 
Otway,"  he  says,  "  in  his  scenes  of  passionate  affection  rival, 
at  least,  and  sometimes  excel  those  of  Shakspeare."  Again : 
"  The  comedies  of  Congreve  contain  probably  more  wit  than 
was  ever  before  embodied  upon  the  stage ;  each  word  was  a 
jest,  and  yet  so  characteristic  that  the  repartee  of  the  servant 
is  distinguished  from  that  of  the  master;  the  jest  of  the  cox- 
comb from  that  of  the  humorist  or  fine  gentleman  of  the 
piece."  Lesser  writers  of  the  time  are  also  sympathetically 
characterized, — Shadwell,  for  instance,  whom  he  thought 
to  be  commonly  underestimated.1  The  heroic  play  Scott  dis- 
cussed vivaciously  in  more  than  one  connection,  for,  as  we 
should  expect,  his  sense  of  humor  found  its  absurdities  tempt- 
ing.2 On  the  rant  in  the  Conquest  of  Granada  he  remarked, 
"  Dryden's  apology  for  these  extravagances  seems  to  be  that 
Almanzor  is  in  a  passion.     But  although  talking  nonsense  is  a 

1  See  Scott's  article  on  Moliere,  Foreign  Quarterly  Reviczv,  February, 
1828. 

2  Essay  on  Drama ;  Dryden,  Vol.  I,  p.  101  ff.,  Vol.  II,  pp.  317-20,  Vol.  IV, 
p.  4- 


58  SCOTT   AS   A   CRITIC    OF   LITERATURE 

common  effect  of  passion,  it  seems  hardly  one  of  those  conse- 
quences adapted  to  show  forth  the  character  of  a  hero  in 
theatrical  representation."1  Scott's  opinion  of  the  form  of 
these  plays  appears  in  the  following  comment :  "  We  doubt 
if,  with  his  utmost  efforts,  [Moliere]  could  have  been  abso- 
lutely dull,  without  the  assistance  of  a  pastoral  subject  and 
heroic  measure."2  Concerning"  the  indecency  of  the  literature 
of  the  period  Scott  wrote  emphatically.  He  was  much  troubled 
by  the  problem  of  whether  to  publish  Dryden's  works  without 
any  cutting,  and  came  near  taking  Ellis's  advice  to  omit  some 
portions,  but  he  finally  adhered  to  his  original  determination : 
"  In  making  an  edition  of  a  man  of  genius's  works  for  libraries 
and  collections  ...  I  must  give  my  author  as  I  find  him,  and 
will  not  tear  out  the  page,  even  to  get  rid  of  the  blot,  little  as 
I  like  it."3 

The  question  of  the  morality  of  theater-going  was  one  Scott 
felt  obliged  to  discuss  when  he  was  writing  upon  the  drama. 
He  found  its  vindication,  characteristically,  in  a  universal 
human  trait, — the  impulse  toward  mimicry  and  impersonation, 
— and  in  the  good  results  that  may  be  supposed  to  attend  it. 
In  naming  these  he  lays  what  seems  like  undue  stress  on  the 
teaching  of  history  by  the  drama,  in  language  that  might  quite 
as  well  be  applied  to  historical  novels.  His  argument  on  the 
literary  side  also  is  stated  in  a  somewhat  too  sweeping  way : — 
"  Had  there  been  no  drama,  Shakespeare  would,  in  all  likeli- 
hood, have  been  but  the  author  of  Venus  and  Adonis  and  of  a 
few  sonnets  forgotten  among  the  numerous  works  of  the  Eliza- 
bethan age,  and  Otway  had' been  only  the  compiler  of  fantastic 
odes."4  A  final  plea,  in  favor  of  the  stage  as  a  democratic 
agency — though  this  of  course  is  not  Scott's  phrasing — seems 
slightly  unusual  for  him,  although  not  essentially  out  of  char- 
acter. "  The  entertainment,"  he  says,  "  which  is  the  subject 
of  general  enjoyment,  is  of  a  nature  which  tends  to  soften, 
if  not  to  level,  the  distinction  of  ranks."5     In  another  mood  he 

1Dryden,  Vol.  IV,  p.  4. 

2  Article  on  Moliere,  Foreign  Quarterly  Review,  February,   1828. 

3  Lockhart,  Vol.   I,  p.  431. 

4  Review  of  Kelly's  Reminiscences  and  the  Life  of  Kemble,  Quarterly 
Review,  June,  1826. 

5  Ibid. 


DRYDEN  59 

admitted  the  greater  likelihood  that  immoral  plays  would  injure 
the  public  character  than  that  moral  plays  would  elevate  it.1 

It  is  sufficiently  apparent  to  any  student  of  Scott's  work  that 
he  was  personally  very  fond  of  the  drama.  Many  of  the  lit- 
erary references  and  allusions  which  appear  in  great  abundance 
throughout  his  writings  are  from  plays,  and  show,  as  we  have 
seen,  a  wide  acquaintance  with  English  dramatic  writers,  from 
Shakspere  to  such  comparatively  little-known  playwrights  as 
Suckling  and  Cowley.  In  the  Letters  of  Mala c hi  Malagrozether 
on  the  Currency,  for  example,  Scott's  unusual  range  of  read- 
ing reveals  itself  even  in  connection  with  a  subject  remote  from 
his  ordinary  field,  and  here  as  elsewhere  he  shows  himself  prone 
to  quote  from  the  drama.2  But  Scott  was  interested  in  plays 
for  what  he  found  in  them  of  characters  and  manners,  of 
witty  and  sententious  speech,  of  situations  and  incidents,  and 
only  secondarily  in  the  technical  aspects  of  the  drama.  Read- 
ing his  novels  we  could  guess  that  he  would  care  more  for 
the  concrete  elements  of  a  play  than  for  the  orderly  march 
of  events  through  the  various  stages  of  a  formally  proper  con- 
struction. In  this  respect  he  differs  from  Coleridge  ;  but  indeed 
the  two  men  may  be  contrasted  at  almost  every  point.  In 
summing  up  this  part  of  Scott's  criticism  we  must  remember 
also  that  it  was  chiefly  incidental.  Perhaps  whatever  qualities 
it  exhibits  are  on  this  account  particularly  characteristic :  at 
any  rate  his  opinions  on  the  drama  were  the  reaction  of  a,n 
unusually  capable  mind  upon  a  department  of  literature  in 
which  his  reading  was  all  the  more  fruitful  because  it  fol- 
lowed the  lines  of  a  natural  inclination. 

THE  SEVENTEENTH  CENTURY Dryden 

Scott's  preparations  for  his  edition  of  Dryden  —  Wide  Scope  of  the 
work — Scott's  estimation  of  Dryden  —  Grounds  for  putting  Dryden 
above  Chaucer  and  Spenser  —  Admirable  style  of  the  biography  —  Com- 
ments by  Scott  on  other  seventeenth  century  writers. 

The  edition  of  Dryden' s  Complete  Works  deserves  further 
notice,  especially  since  only  eight  of  the  eighteen  volumes  are 

1  Dryden,  Vol.  VI,  p.  128. 

2  In  Provincial  Antiquities  (Borthwick  Castle),  Scott  cites  parallels  from 
Sir  John  Oldcastle,  The  Pinner  of  Wakefield,  and  one  of  Nash's  pamphlets, 
for  a  curious  incident  in  Scottish  history. 


60  SCOTT   AS   A   CRITIC   OF   LITERATURE 

occupied  with  the  plays,  and  these  have  less  commentary  than 
other  parts  of  the  works.  In  1805  Scott  wrote  to  his  friend, 
George  Ellis,  "  My  critical  notes  will  not  be  very  numerous, 
but  I  hope  to  illustrate  the  political  poems,  as  Absalom  and 
Achitophel,  the  Hind  and  Panther,  etc.,  with  some  curious 
annotations.  I  have  already  made  a  complete  search  among 
some  hundred  pamphlets  of  that  pamphlet-writing  age,  and 
with  considerable  success,  as  I  have  found  several  which  throw 
light  on  mv  author."1  He  added  that  another  edition  of 
Dryden  was  proposed,  and  Ellis  wrote  in  answer,  "  With  re- 
gard to  your  competitors,  I  feel  perfectly  at  my  ease,  because 
I  am  convinced  that  though  you  should  generously  furnish  them 
with  all  the  materials,  they  would  not  know  how  to  use  them ; 
non  cuivis  hominum  contingit  to  write  critical  notes  that  anyone 
will  read."2 

1Lockhart,  Vol.  I,  p.  431.  This  search  among  seventeenth  century 
pamphlets  may  have  suggested  to  Scott  the  need  of  a  new  edition  of 
Somers'  Tracts.  Apparently  he  arranged  with  the  publishers  in  1807  to 
undertake  this  task,  but  the  first  volume  did  not  appear  till  1809.  {Lock- 
hart,  Vol.  II,  p.  10,  and  see  below,  pp.  89-90,  for  an  account  of  Scott's 
edition  of  the  Tracts.)  Some  of  his  materials  for  the  Dryden  were  taken 
from  this  collection,  but  more  from  the  Luttrell  collection,  to  which  he 
refers  in  the  Advertisement. 

2  Lockhart,  Vol.  I,  p.  433.  Scott's  Dryden  appeared  in  1808,  and  with 
some  slight  changes  in  1821  ;  as  reedited  by  Mr.  Saintsbury  it  was  pub- 
lished in  1882-1893.  It  was  the  first  complete  and  uniform  edition  of 
Dryden's  works,  and  it  remains  the  only  one.  The  dramatic  works  had 
appeared  in  folio  in  1701.  They  were  edited  by  Congreve  in  171 7,  and 
Scott  used  Congreve's  text.  The  non-dramatic  poems  were  also  published 
in  1 701  in  folio.  They  appeared  in  more  convenient  forms  in  1741,  i743» 
and  1760,  but  of  these  editions  only  the  last  was  reasonably  complete. 
In  1800  the  Critical  and  Miscellaneous  Prose  Works  were  edited  by  Malone, 
who  added  a  Life  of  Dryden  which  has  furnished  a  large  part  of  the 
material  used  by  biographers  since  his  time.  This  biography  was  badly 
written,  but  with  Johnson's  brilliant  essay  it  was  the  only  Life  of  Dryden 
before  Scott's  that  was  worth  considering.  An  edition  of  Dryden's  poems, 
with  notes  by  Joseph  Warton  and  others,  appeared  in  181 1,  but  seems  to 
have  been  prepared  before  Scott's  edition  was  published.  The  text  of  this 
is  very  incorrect.  Since  then  the  non-dramatic  poems  have  been  published 
several  times.  Mr.  Christie  said  in  his  preface  to  the  Globe  edition  :  "  Sir 
Walter  Scott's  is  the  last  important  edition  of  Dryden,  as  it  is  indeed 
still  the  only  general  collection  of  his  works ;  and  it  is  to  be  regretted 
that  that  distinguished  man  did  not  give  as  much  pains  to  the  purification 
of  Dryden's  text  as  he  did  to  his  excellent  biography  and  to  the  notes 
which  enrich  the  edition." 


DRYDEN  61 

When  Scott's  Dryden  was  reedited  and  reissued  in  1882-93 
by  Professor  Saintsbury,  the  new  editor  said:  "It  certainly 
deserves  the  credit  of  being  one  of  the  best-edited  books  on  a 
great  scale  in  English,  save  in  one  particular, — the  revision  of 
the  text."1  The  elaborate  historical  notes  are  left  untouched, 
as  being  "  in  general  thoroughly  trustworthy,"2  though  the 
editor  considers  them  somewhat  excessive,  especially  as  some- 
times containing  illustrative  material  from  perfectly  worthless 
contemporaries.  On  the  other  hand,  the  "  explanation  of  word 
and  phrase  is  a  little  defective."3 

The  most  notable  quality  of  the  Life  of  Drydcn  which  com- 
poses the  first  of  the  eighteen  volumes  is  its  breadth  of  scope. 
Scott's  aim  may  best  be  given  in  his  own  words  in  the  Adver- 
tisement :  "  The  general  critical  view  of  Dryden's  works  being 
sketched  by  Johnson  with  unequalled  felicity,  and  the  incidents 
of  his  life  accurately  discussed  and  ascertained  by  Malone, 
something  seemed  to  remain  for  him  who  should  consider  these 
literary  productions  in  their  succession,  as  actuated  by,  and 
operating  upon,  the  taste  of  an  age  where  they  had  so  pre- 
dominant influence ;  and  who  might,  at  the  same  time,  connect 
the  life  of  Dryden  with  the  history  of  his  publications,  without 
losing  sight  of  the  fate  and  character  of  the  individual."4 

Errors  of  judgment  appear  in  places  :  sometimes  they  are 
due  to  the  imperfect  scholarship  of  the  time ;  sometimes  they 
arise  from  prejudices  of  Scott's  own.  In  the  very  first  chapter 
we  find  him  condemning  Lyly  and  all  writers  of  "  conceited  " 
language — particularly  of  course  the  Metaphysicals — with  a 
thoroughness  that  a  truly  catholic  critic  ought  probably  to 
avoid.  Scott  had  a  constitutional  dislike  for  a  labored  style, 
and  at  the  same  time  a  fondness  for  the  direct  and  straight- 
forward way  of  looking  at  things.     So,  though  he  was  open 

1  Editor's  Preface. 

2  Dryden,  Vol.  IX,  p.  226. 

3  Ibid.,  Vol.  IX,  p.  2. 

4  In  this  connection  Scott's  review  of  Todd's  edition  of  Spenser  is  inter- 
esting. He  takes  exception  to  the  lack  of  an  appearance  of  continuity  in 
the  biography,  caused  by  the  long  quotations  included  in  the  body  of  the 
narrative ;  and  censures  the  editor  for  not  having  used  the  history  of  Italian 
poetry  in  elucidating  Spenser's  work.     (Edinburgh  Review,  October,  1805.) 


62  SCOTT   AS   A    CRITIC   OF   LITERATURE 

to  the  emotional  appeal  of  a  poem  like  Christabel,  he  took  no 
pleasure  in  the  devious  processes  by  which  the  cold  intellect 
has  sometimes  tried  to  give  fresh  interest  to  familiar  words 
and  ideas.  They  quite  prevented  him  from  seeing  the  passion 
in  the  work  of  Donne,  for  example,  and  he  considered  all  meta- 
physical poets,  in  so  far  as  they  showed  the  traits  of  their  class, 
to  be  without  poetical  feeling. 

Scott  placed  Dryden  after  Shakspere  and  Milton  as  third  in 
the  list  of  English  writers.  I  think  he  would  even  have  been 
willing  to  say  that  Dryden  was  the  third  as  a  poet.  For  greatly 
as  he  admired  Chaucer,  Scott  did  not  feel  Chaucer's  full  power, 
and  indeed  it  was  only  beginning  to  be  possible  to  read  Chaucer 
with  any  appreciation  of  his  metrical  excellence.  Spenser,  of 
whom  he  once  wrote :  "  No  author,  perhaps,  ever  possessed  and 
combined  in  so  brilliant  a  degree  the  requisite  qualities  of  a 
poet,"  1  was  more  of  a  favorite  with  Scott  than  Chaucer. 
But  at  another  time  he  spoke  of  Drayton  as  possessing  perhaps 
equal  powers  of  poetry,2  and  he  seems  to  have  felt  that  Spenser 
becomes  tedious  through  the  continued  use  of  his  difficult 
stanza  and  even  more  because  of  the  "  languor  of  a  continued 
allegory."3  In  comparing  his  judgments  on  Spenser  and 
Dryden  we  may  conclude  that  the  critic  found  more  in  the 
later  poet  of  that  solid  intellectual  basis  which  he  emphasizes 
in  characterizing  him.  "  This  power  of  ratiocination,"  says 
Scott,  "  of  investigating,  discovering,  and  appreciating  that 
which  is  really  excellent,  if  accompanied  with  the  necessary 
command  of  fanciful  illustration  and  elegant  expression,  is  the 
most  interesting  quality  which  can  be  possessed  by  a  poet."4 
Again  he  lays  emphasis  on  Dryden's  versatility, — greater,  he 
says,  than  that  of  Shakspere  and  Milton.  In  Old  Mortality 
Dryden  is  referred  to  as  ^the  great  High-priest  of  all  the 
Nine."  Scott  would  have  called  this  another  point  of  his 
superiority  over  Spenser,  if  he  had  made  the  comparison. 

Yet  he  saw  Dryden's  deficiencies.  "  It  was  a  consequence  of 
his  mental  acuteness  that  his  dramatic  personages  often  philoso- 

1  Review  of  Todd's  Spenser. 

2  Dryden,  Vol.  I,  p.  6. 

3  Familiar  Letters,  Vol.  I,  p.  229  ;   and  Dryden,  Vol.  I,  p.  6. 

4  Dryden,  Vol.  I,  pp.  402-3. 


DRYDEN  G3 

phized  and  reasoned  when  they  ought  only  to  have  felt,"1  Scott 
remarks,  and  he  frequently  deplores  Dryden's  failure  "in  ex- 
pressing the  milder  and  more  tender  passions."2  Of  Dryden's 
great  gift  of  style,  Scott  speaks  in  the  highest  terms.  "  With  this 
power,"  he  says,  "  Dryden's  poetry  was  gifted  in  a  degree  sur- 
passing in  modulated  harmony  that  of  all  who  had  preceded 
him,  and  inferior  to  none  that  has  since  written  English  verse 
[sic] .  He  first  showed  " — and  here  we  see  Scott's  eighteenth- 
century  affinities — "  that  the  English  language  was  capable  of 
uniting  smoothness  and  strength."3 

Such  criticism  as  Scott  gives  on  specific  parts  of  Dryden's 
work  is  clear-cut,  fair  for  the  most  part,  and  has  the  sanity  and 
reasonableness  which  are  the  most  noticeable  qualities  of  his 
criticism  in  general.  It  would  be  easier  to  find  illustrations  of 
shrewdness  than  of  subtlety  among  his  notes,  but  his  discrimi- 
nations are  often  effective  and  satisfying.  His  discussion,  for 
example,  of  prologues  and  epilogues  considered  in  relation  to 
the  theatrical  conditions  which  determined  their  character  is 
admirable.4  A  note  on  "  the  cant  of  supposing  that  the  Iliad 
contained  an  obvious  and  intentional  moral  "5  is  also  full  of 
sense  and  vigor,  but  these  qualities  are  so  thoroughly  diffused 
through  the  work  that  there  is  no  need  of  particularizing.  His 
praise  of  Alexander's  Feast  may  be  referred  to,  however,  as 
showing  his  characteristic  delight  in  objective  poetry.6  As  a 
lyric  poet,  he  says,  Dryden  "  must  be  allowed  to  have  no  equal."7 

1  Dryden,   Vol.   I,   p.   403. 

2 Ibid.,  p.  404.  Mr.  Saintsbury  thinks  that  Scott's  prefatory  introductions 
to  the  plays  are  often  "  both  meagre  and  depreciatory  "  ;  also  that  Scott's 
judgment  on  Dryden's  letters  is  rather  harsh,  for  him,  and  that  after  he 
had  begun  to  write  novels  he  would  not  have  been  so  impatient  of  remarks 
on  "  turkeys,  marrow-puddings,  and  bacon." 

3  Ibid.,  Vol.  I.  p.  405.  5Ibid.,  Vol.  XIV,  pp.  136  and  146. 

*Ibid.,  Vol.  X,  p.  307  fT.  "Ibid.,  Vol.  I,  p.  405. 

7  In  order  to  give  a  more  specific  view  of  Scott's  methods,  two  or  three 
of  the  introductions  to  well-known  poems  may  be  briefly  analysed.  The 
introduction  to  Absalom  and  Achitophel  occupies  i\]/2  pages,  of  which 
about  2l/2  are  given  to  quotation  from  a  tract  which  Scott  thought  fur- 
nished the  argument  to  Dryden,  and  which  was  unnoticed  by  any  former 
commentator.  Scott's  remarks  follow  this  outline :  Position  of  the  poem 
in  literature,  and  history  of  its  composition  ;  origin  of  the  particular 
allegory  as  applied  to  modern  politics  ;  a  parallel  use  of  the  allegory  (with 
a  quotation  from  Somcrs'  Tracts  in  illustrations)  ;  aptness  of  the  allegory  ; 


64  SCOTT   AS   A    CRITIC   OF   LITERATURE 

The  peculiarly  congenial  qualities  of  the  subject  may  have 
had  something  to  do  with  the  fact  that  the  style  in  which  the 
Life  of  Drydcn  is  written  is  noticeably  better  than  that  of 
Scott's  ordinary  work.  It  is  marked  with  a  care  and  accuracy 
that  were  not,  unfortunately,  habitual  to  him.  Perhaps  it  was 
an  advantage  that  when  he  wrote  the  book  he  had  not  yet 
become  altogether  familiar  with  his  own  facility ;  certainly  the 
substance  and  the  manner  of  treatment  unite  in  making  this 
the  most  important  of  his  critical  biographies. 

Various  references  indicate  that  Scott  was  acquainted  in  at 
least  a  general  way  with  English  writers  throughout  the  whole 
of  Dryden's  century.  He  speaks  of  the  poems  of  Phineas 
Fletcher  as  containing  "  many  passages  fully  equal  to  Spenser  "  ;x 
he  says  that  Cowley  "  is  now  .  .  .  undeservedly  forgotten  "  ;2 
he  calls  Hudibras  "  the  most  witty  poem  that  ever  was  written,"3 
but  says,  "  the  perpetual  scintillation  of  Butler's  wit  is  too  daz- 
zling to  be  delightful";4  he  talks  of  Waller  and  quotes  from 
him;5  he   refers  to  the  charming  quality  of  Isaac  Walton's 

merits  of  the  satire — treatment  of  Monmouth  and  other  main  characters ; 
changes  in  the  second  edition  to  mitigate  the  satire ;  characterization  of 
the  poem  as  having  few  flights  of  imagination  but  much  correctness  of 
taste  as  well  as  fire  and  spirit;  other  objections  by  Johnson  refuted;  suc- 
cess of  the  poem ;  history  of  the  first  publication  and  of  the  replies  and 
congratulatory  poems ;  editions,  and  Latin  versions.  The  notes  on  this 
poem  are  historical  and  very  full,  but  the  introduction  contains  as  much 
literary  as  historical  comment.  Religio  Laici  is  prefaced  by  8  pages 
of  introduction,  in  which  are  discussed  the  motive  of  the  writing,  the 
argument,  the  title,  the  purpose  of  the  poem,  and  its  reputation.  Dryden's 
style  in  didactic  poetry  is  compared  with  Cowper's,  to  the  disadvantage  of 
the  later  poet.  The  introduction  to  The  Hind  and  the  Panther  is  20  pages 
long,  and  discusses  the  history  of  the  period  as  well  as  the  argument  of 
the  poem,  its  style,  the  subject  of  fables  in  general,  and  the  effects  the 
poem  produced.  The  notes  on  this  poem  are  copious.  As  he  discussed 
the  Fables  in  the  Life  of  Dryden,  Scott  gave  them  no  general  introduction, 
and  for  each  poem  he  wrote  only  a  slight  preface,  telling  something  of  the 
source  and  pointing  out  special  beauties.  His  notes  vary  greatly  in  abund- 
ance. Those  on  Palamon  and  Arcite,  e.  g.,  are  brief,  explaining  terms  of 
chivalry  and  heraldry,  but  not  giving  literary   or  linguistic  comment. 

1  Dryden,  Vol.   XIII,  p.   324.  *  Ibid.,  Vol.  X,  p.  213. 

-  Ibid.,   Vol.    XII,   p.   20.  *Ibid.,  Vol.  I,  p.  411. 

5  Ibid.,  Vol.  I,  p.  98.  See  also  St.  Ronan's  Well,  Vol.  I,  p.  105,  and 
various  mottoes  in  the  novels.  The  edition  of  the  novels  used  for  refer- 
ence is  that  published  in  Edinburgh   (1867)   in  48  volumes. 


SWIFT  66 

work;1  and  he  adopts  Samuel  Pepys  as  a  familiar  acquaint- 
ance.2 Those  references  occur  mostly  in  the  Drydcn  or  in  the 
novels,  and  we  may  conclude  that  the  work  for  the  Drydcn 
gathered  up  and  strengthened  all  Scott's  acquaintance  with  the 
literature  of  the  seventeenth  century,  from  Shakspere  and 
Milton  down  to  writers  of  altogether  minor  importance;  and 
gave  him  material  for  many  of  the  allusions  that  appear  in  his 
later  work.  It  is  probably  true  that  there  are  more  quotations 
from  Drydcn  in  Scott's  books  than  from  any  other  one  author,3 
though  lines  from  Shakspere  occurred  more  often  in  his  con- 
versation and  familiar  letters. 

THE  EIGHTEENTH    CENTURY 

Swift 

The  preparation  of  Swift's  Complete  Works — Comparison  of  the 
Dryden  and  the  Swift  —  The  bibliographical  problem  presented  by 
Swift's  works  —  Inaccuracies  in  the  biography  —  Scott's  success  in  por- 
traying a  perplexing  temperament  —  Judicious  quality  of  his  literary 
criticism. 

As  soon  as  the  Dryden  was  completed  Scott  was  offered 
twice  as  much  money  as  he  had  received  for  that  work,  for  a 
similar  edition  of  Swift.4  He  readily  undertook  the  task,  and 
in  the  midst  of  many  other  editorial  engagements  set  to  work 
upon  it.  The  preparation  of  the  book  extended  over  the  six 
years  during  which  Scott  ran  the  greater  part  of  his  poetical 
career.     On  its  appearance  one  of  his  friends  expressed  the 

1  Dryden,  Vol.  X,  p.  26. 

2  For  example  see  Anne  of  Geier stein,  Vol.  II,  p.  307. 

3  Letters  to  Heber,  p.  292. 

4  The  price  offered  for  the  Swift  was  £1500.  This  must  have  been  a 
rather  rash  speculation  on  the  publisher's  part,  as  there  had  been  several 
editions  of  Swift's  works  published.  The  first  appeared  in  twelve  volumes 
in  1 755,  edited  by  Hawkesworth.  Deane  Swift,  Hawkesworth,  and  others, 
added  thirteen  more  volumes  in  the  course  of  the  next  twenty-five  years, 
and  when  the  whole  was  completed  it  was  reissued  in  three  different  sizes. 
In  1785  an  edition  in  seventeen  volumes  was  published,  edited  by  Thomas 
Sheridan.  In  1801  the  edition  by  Nichols  was  published,  and  it  reap- 
peared in  1804  and  in  1808.  Hawkesworth  and  Thomas  Sheridan  supplied 
biographies  which  Leslie  Stephen  characterized  by  saying  that  Hawkes- 
worth's  gave  no  new  material  and  that  Sheridan's  was  "  pompous  and 
dull."     (Preface  to  Leslie  Stephen's  Life  of  Swift.) 

5 


66  SCOTT   AS   A    CRITIC    OF   LITERATURE 

feeling  which  every  student  of  Scott  must  have  had  in  regard 
to  the  large  editorial  labors  that  he  undertook,  in  saying,  "  I 
am  delighted  and  surprised;  for  how  a  person  of  your  turn 
could  wade  through,  and  so  accurately  analyze  what  you  have 
done  (namely,  all  the  dull  things  calculated  to  illustrate  your 
author),  seems  almost  impossible,  and  a  prodigy  in  the  history 
of  the  human  mind."  The  work  was  first  published  in  1814. 
Ten  years  later  it  was  revised  and  reissued ;  and  Scott's  Swift 
has,  like  his  Dryden,  been  the  standard  edition  of  that  author 
ever  since. 

In  each  case  Scott  had  to  deal  with  an  important  and  varied 
body  of  literature  in  the  two  fields  of  poetry  and  prose,  though 
the  proportions  were  different ;  and  in  each  case  he  had  occa- 
sion for  illustrative  historical  annotations  of  the  kind  that  he 
wrote  with  unrivalled  facility.  He  was  master  of  the  political 
intrigues  of  Queen  Anne's  reign  no  less  completely  than  of  the 
circumstances  which  gave  rise  to  Absalom  and  Achitophel,  and 
the  fact  that  his  notes  are  less  voluminous  in  the  Swift  is  prob- 
ably to  be  accounted  for  by  the  comparative  absence  of  quaint- 
ness  in  the  literary  and  social  fashions  of  the  eighteenth  century. 

The  peculiar  conditions  under  which  Swift's  writings  had  ap- 
peared, and  his  remarkable  indifference  to  literary  fame,  gave 
the  editor  opportunity  to  look  for  material  which  had  not  before 
been  included  in  his  works.  The  diligent  search  of  Scott  and 
his  various  correspondents  enabled  him  to  add  about  thirty 
poems,  between  sixty  and  seventy  letters  from  Swift,  and  about 
sixteen  other  small  pieces.  The  most  noteworthy  item  among 
these  additions  was  the  correspondence  between  Swift  and 
Miss  Vanhomrigh,  of  which  only  a  very  small  part  had  pre- 
viously been  made  public.2 

Scott's  notes  seem  to  indicate  that  most  of  the  necessary 
searching  through  newspapers  and  obscure  pamphlets  for  for- 
gotten work  of  Swift  was  performed  by  "  obliging  correspon- 
dents," and  that  the  editor  himself  had  only  to  pass  judgment 
on  what  was  brought  to  his  attention.     This  impression  may 

1  Correspondence  of  C.  K.  Sharpe,  Vol.  II,  p.   178. 

2  This  correspondence  consisted  of  28  letters  from  Swift,  and  16  from 
"  Vanessa." 


SWIFT  (17 

arise  largely  from  his  cordiality  in  expressing  indebtedness  to 
his  helpers,  but  it  is  certain  that  his  position  as  a  popular  poet 
gave  Scott  the  assistance  of  many  people  who  would  not  have 
been  enlisted  in  the  work  by  an  ordinary  editor.  But  Scott 
had  the  difficult  task  of  deciding  whether  the  unauthenticated 
pieces  were  to  be  assigned  to  Swift.  The  bibliography  of 
Swift  is  still  so  uncertain  that  it  is  impossible  to  say  how  many 
of  the  small  pamphlets  in  verse  and  prose  added  in  this  edition 
are  really  his  work.1  Scott  had  good  reason  for  his  additions 
in  most  cases,  though  sometimes,  as  he  was  aware,  the  Dean  had 
merely  revised  the  work  of  other  people.  The  editor  was  occa- 
sionally over-credulous  in  attributing  pieces  to  Swift, but  he  was 
perhaps  oftener  too  generous  in  giving  room  to  things  which  he 
knew  had  very  little  claim  to  be  considered  Swift's  work. 
When  he  was  in  doubt  he  chose  to  err  on  the  safe  side,  accord- 
ing to  the  principles  set  forth  in  the  following  note  on  the 
Letter  from  Dr.  Tripe  to  Nestor  Ironside:  "The  piece  contains 
a  satirical  description  of  Steele's  person,  and  should  the  editor 
be  mistaken  in  conjecturing  that  Swift  contributed  to  compose 
it,  may  nevertheless,  at  this  distance  of  time,  merit  preserva- 
tion as  a  literary  curiosity."2     The  ample  space  afforded  by  the 

1  A  comparison  of  the  index  with  the  bibliography  in  the  Dictionary  of 
National  Biography  and  with  Mr.  Stanley  Lane-Poole's  Notes  for  a  Bibli- 
ography of  Swift  (Bibliographer,  vi :  160-71)  shows  that  Scott  was  usually 
right  in  his  judgment  on  the  main  articles.  But  since  Mr.  Lane-Poole 
ends  his  list  thus  :  "  And  numerous  short  poems,  trifles,  characters  and  short 
pieces,"  it  is  evident  that  one  cannot  carry  the  investigation  far  without 
undertaking  to  make  a  complete  bibliography  of  Swift.  Mr.  Temple  Scott 
says,  in  the  Advertisement  of  his  edition  of  Swift's  Prose  Works,  begun 
in  1897,  that  since  Sir  Walter's  edition  of  1824  "  there  has  been  no  serious 
attempt  to  grapple  with  the  difficulties  which  then  prevented  and  which 
still  beset  the  attainment  of  a  trustworthy  and  substantially  complete  text." 

-  Swift,  Vol.  IV,  p.  280.  Two  more  of  Scott's  comments  may  be  given, 
further  to  illustrate  his  method.  "  This  piece  [William  Crowe's  Address 
to  her  Majesty,  Swift,  Vol.  XII,  p.  265]  and  those  which  follow,  were  first 
extracted  by  the  learned  Dr.  Barrett,  of  Trinity  College,  Dublin,  from  the 
Lanesborough  and  other  manuscripts.  I  have  retained  them  from  internal 
evidence,  as  I  have  discarded  some  articles  upon  the  same  score."  "  The 
following  poems  [poems  given  as  "  ascribed  to  Swift,"  Vol.  X,  p.  434]  are 
extracted  from  the  manuscript  of  Lord  Lanesborough,  called  the  Whimsical 
Medley.  They  are  here  inserted  in  deference  to  the  opinion  of  a  most 
obliging  correspondent,  who  thinks  they  are  juvenile  attempts  of  Swift.  I 
own  I  cannot  discover  much  internal  evidence  in  support  of  the  suppo- 
sition." 


68  SCOTT   AS    A    CRITIC   OF   LITERATURE 

nineteen  volumes  of  the  book  gives  room  to  Arbuthnot's  His- 
tory of  John  Bull — because  it  was  "  usually  published  in  Swift's 
works," — to  the  verses  addressed  to  the  Dean  and  those  written 
in  memory  of  him,  as  well  as  to  the  prose  and  verse  miscellanies 
of  Pope  and  Swift,  and  the  miscellanies  and  jeux  d 'esprit  of 
Swift  and  Sheridan.  Swift's  correspondence  fills  the  last  four, 
and  a  half  volumes. 

The  biography,  which  occupies  the  first  volume,  is  admir- 
able in  tone,  but  the  facts  Scott  gives  are  less  to  be  relied  upon 
than  the  inferences  and  conclusions  he  derives  from  them.  He 
corresponded  with  persons  who  were  in  a  position  to  know 
about  Swift  from  his  friends  and  acquaintances,  and  probably 
he  trusted  too  much  to  these  "  original  sources."  We  find,  as 
perhaps  the  most  noteworthy  instance,  that  the  marriage  to 
Stella  is  stated  as  an  ascertained  fact,  on  authority  that  is  not 
now  considered  convincing.  Later  biographers  of  Swift, — Sir 
Henry  Craik,  Leslie  Stephen,  Mr.  Churton  Collins, — have  borne 
witness  to  the  human  interest  of  Scott's  biography,  and  its  pre- 
eminence, in  spite  of  inaccuracies,  among  all  the  Lives  of  Swift 
that  have  been  written.  But  Mr.  Churton  Collins  thinks  Scott 
did  not  present  a  really  clear  view  of  Swift's  mysterious  char- 
acter, and  Craik  says  he  took  only  the  conventional  attitude 
towards  Swift's  politics,  misanthropy,  and  religion.  The  charge 
indicates  Scott's  weakness,  and  perhaps  also  much  of  his 
strength,  as  a  biographer  and  critic,  for  he  had  no  prejudice 
against  the  conventional  as  such,  and  was  never  anxious  to 
exhibit  special  "  insight "  of  any  kind.  Yet  I  think  his  por- 
trayal of  Swift  has  seemed  to  most  readers  a  clear  presenta- 
tion of  a  real  and  comprehensible  character.1 

1  Colonel  Parnell,  writing  in  the  English  Historical  Review  on  "  Dean 
Swift  and  the  Memoirs  of  Captain  Carleton,"  has  spoken  of  the  biography 
as  "  this  most  partial,  verbose,  and  inaccurate  account  of  the  dean's  life 
and  writings."  He  says  also  that  in  editing  Carleton' s  Memoirs  Scott 
adopted,  without  investigation  and  in  the  face  of  evidence,  Johnson's  opin- 
ion that  the  memoirs  were  genuine ;  that  Scott  was  mistaken  about  the 
date  of  the  first  edition  and  misquoted  the  title  page ;  and  that  his  "  glow- 
ing account "  of  Lord  Peterborough,  in  the  introduction,  was  amplified 
(without  acknowledgment)  from  a  panegyric  by  Dr.  Birch  in  "  Houbraken's 
Heads."  {English  Historical  Review,  January,  1891  ;  vi :  97.  For  a  fur- 
ther reference  to  the  article  see  below,  p.   144.) 


SWIFT  69 

Scott's  remark  when  he  undertook  the  work,  that  Swift  was 
one  of  his  early  favorites,1  seems  surprising  when  one  remem- 
bers how  his  genial  nature  recoiled  from  misanthropy  and 
cynicism  ;  but  his  treatment  of  the  Dean  was  so  sympathetic 
that  Jeffrey  thought  him  decidedly  too  lenient,  and  was  moved 
to  express  righteous  indignation  in  the  pages  of  the  Edinburgh 
Review.2  The  rebuke  was  unnecessary,  for  Scott  did  not  omit 
to  record  Swift's  failings  and  to  express  wholesomely  vigorous 
opinions  concerning  them,  though  he  felt  that  they  ought  to  be 
looked  upon  as  evidences  of  disease  rather  than  of  guilt.  He 
felt  also,  with  perhaps  some  excess  of  charity  but  surely  not 
such  as  could  be  in  the  least  harmful,  that  "  if  the  Dean's  prin- 
ciples were  misanthropical,  his  practice  was  benevolent.  Few 
have  written  so  much  with  so  little  view  either  to  fame  or  to 
profit,  or  to  aught  but  benefit  to  the  public."3  Jeffrey's  con- 
demnation of  Scott's  point  of  view  was  mingled  writh  just 
praise.  He  said  of  the  biography :  "  It  is  quite  fair  and  mod- 
erate in  politics ;  and  perhaps  rather  too  indulgent  and  tender 
towards  individuals  of  all  descriptions, — more  full,  at  least,  of 
kindness  and  veneration  for  genius  and  social  virtue,  than  of 
indignation  at  baseness  and  profligacy.  Altogether  it  is  not 
much  like  the  production  of  a  mere  man  of  letters,  or  a  fastid- 
ious speculator  in  sentiment  and  morality  :  but  exhibits  through- 
out, and  in  a  very  pleasing  form,  the  good  sense  and  large 
toleration  of  a  man  of  the  world." 

The  very  practical  motives  that  inspired  most  of  Swift's 
pamphlets  wrould  naturally  attract  Scott.  Probably  it  was  the 
remembrance  of  the  Drapie/s  Letters  that  suggested  to  him 
a  similar  form  of  protest  against  proposed  changes  in  the  Scot- 
tish currency;  certainly  the  Letters  of  Malachi  MalagriK^tJicr 
had  an  effect  comparable  to  that  of  Swift's  more  consummately 
ingenious  appeal.  Another  quality  in  Swift's  work  that  would 
naturally  arouse  Scott's  admiration  was  the  remarkable  direct- 
ness and  lucidity  of  the  style.  Scott  appreciated  the  originality 
and  force  of  Swift,  even  when  it  was  used  in  the  service  of 

1  Lockhart,  Vol.  II,  p.  20. 

2  September,  1816. 

3Szvift,  Vol.  XVII,  p.  4,  note. 


70  SCOTT   AS   A    CRITIC   OF   LITERATURE 

satire.  Sometimes,  he  says,  "  the  intensity  of  his  satire  gives 
to  his  poetry  a  character  of  emphatic  violence  which  borders 
upon  grandeur."1  The  editor's  discussion  of  Gulliver's  Travels, 
an  acute  and  illuminating  little  essay,  contains  one  comment 
that  gives  an  amusing  revelation  of  his  point  of  view.  He  says 
in  regard  to  the  fourth  part  of  the  story :  "  It  is  some  consola- 
tion to  remark  that  the  fiction  on  which  this  libel  on  human 
nature  rests  is  in  every  respect  gross  and  improbable,  and,  far 
from  being  entitled  to  the  praise  due  to  the  management  of  the 
first  two  parts,  is  inferior  in  plan  even  to  the  third."2  This  is 
a  sound  verdict,  even  if  it  does  contain  an  extra-literary  ele- 
ment. Scott  surpassed  most  of  his  contemporaries,  except  the 
younger  Romantic  writers,  in  his  ability  to  eliminate  irrelevant 
considerations  in  estimating  any  literary  work;  and  if  occa- 
sionally his  strong  moral  feeling  appears  in  his  criticism,  it 
serves  to  remind  us  how  much  less  often  this  happens  than  a 
knowledge  of  his  temperament  would  lead  us  to  expect.  In 
spite  of  the  qualities  in  his  subject  that  might  naturally  bias 
Scott's  judgment,  his  criticism  throughout  this  edition  of 
Swift  seems  on  the  whole  very  judicious.  It  defines  the  lit- 
erary importance  and  brings  out  plainly  the  power  of  a  man 
whose  work  presents  unusual  perplexities  to  the  critic. 

The  Somers  Tracts 

Character  of  the  collection  and  of  Scott's  work  on  it  —  Occasional 
carelessness  —  Purpose  of  the  notes  —  Scott's  attitude  towards  these 
studies. 

While  Scott  was  working  on  his  Dryden  and  before  he  began 
the  Swift  he  undertook  to  edit  the  great  collection  which  had 
been  published  fifty  years  before  as  Somers'  Tracts.  His  task 
was  to  arrange,  revise,  and  annotate  pamphlets  which  repre- 
sented every  reign  from  Elizabeth  to  George  I.  He  grouped 
them  chronologically  by  reigns,  and  separated  them  further 
into  sections  under  the  headings, — Ecclesiastical,  Historical, 
Civil,  Military,  Miscellaneous;  he  also  added  eighty-one  pam- 
phlets, all  written  before  the  time  of  James  II.     The  largest 

1  Life  of  Swift,  conclusion.  2  Swift,  Vol.  XI,  p.  12. 


THE   SOMERS  TRACTS  71 

number  of  additions  in  any  one  section  was  historical  and  had 
reference  to  Strafford.  Among  the  miscellaneous  tracts  that 
he  incorporated  wore  Derrick's  Image  of  Ireland  from  a  copy 
in  the  Advocates'  Library,  and  Gosson's  School  of  Abuse. 
Scott's  statement  in  the  Advertisement  as  to  why  he  did  not 
omit  any  of  the  original  collection  shows  his  unpedantic  atti- 
tude toward  the  kind  of  studies  which  he  was  encouraging  by 
the  republication  of  this  series.  He  says :  "  When  the  variety 
of  literary  pursuits,  and  the  fluctuation  of  fashionable  study 
is  considered,  it  may  seem  rash  to  pass  a  hasty  sentence  of 
exclusion,  even  upon  the  dullest  and  most  despised  of  the 
essays  which  this  ample  collection  offers  to  the  public.  There 
may  be  among  the  learned,  even  now,  individuals  to  whom  the 
rabbinical  lore  of  Hugh  B  rough  ton  presents  more  charms  than 
the  verses  of  Homer ;  and  a  future  day  may  arise  when  tracts 
on  chronology  will  bear  as  high  a  value  among  antiquaries  as 
'  Greene's  Groats'  Worth  of  Wit,'  or  '  George  Peek's  Jests/ 
the  present  respectable  objects  of  research  and  reverence." 

In  editing  this  collection  Scott  made  little  attempt  to  decide 
disputed  problems  of  authorship  when  the  explanation  did  not 
lie  upon  the  surface.  Indeed  the  following  note  regarding  the 
tract  called  A  New  Test  of  the  Church  of  England's  Loyalty 
shows  that  he  sometimes  neglected  very  obvious  sources  of 
information,  for  the  piece  is  given  in  one  of  Defoe's  own  col- 
lections of  his  works :  "  This  defence  of  whiggish  loyalty,"  says 
Scott,  "  seems  to  have  been  written  by  the  celebrated  Daniel 
De  Foe,  a  conjecture  which  is  strengthened  by  the  frequent 
reference  to  his  poem  of  the  True-born  Englishman."1  He 
was  not  often  so  careless,  but  the  rapidity  and  range  of  his 
work  during  these  years  undoubtedly  gave  occasion  for  more 
than  one  lapse  of  accuracy,  while  at  the  same  time  it  perhaps 
increased  the  effectiveness  of  his  comment. 

1  Vol.  IX,  p.  569.  The  tract  had  already  been  correctly  assigned.  A 
similar  note  on  another  tract  indicates  more  careful  research  on  the 
part  of  the  editor.  The  paper  is  A  Secret  History  of  One  Year,  which 
had  commonly  been  attributed  to  Robert  Walpole.  Scott  says :  "  This 
tract  is  not  to  be  found  in  Mr.  Coxe's  list  of  Sir  Robert  Walpole's 
publications,  nor  in  that  given  by  his  son,  the  Earl  of  Oxford,  in  the 
Royal  and  Noble  Authors.  ...  It  does  not  seem  at  all  probable  that 
Walpole  should  at  this  crisis  have  thought  it  proper  to  advocate  these  prin- 
ciples."    (Vol.  XIII,  p.  873.)     The  piece  is  now  attributed  to  Defoe. 


72  SCOTT    AS    A    CRITIC    OF   LITERATURE 

His  notes  and  introductions  vary  in  length  according  to  the 
requirements  of  the  case,  for  he  aimed  to  provide  such  material 
as  would  prevent  the  necessity  of  reference  to  other  works. 
Matters  that  were  obscure  he  explained,  and  he  wrote  little 
comment  on  those  that  were  generally  understood.  When  he 
left  himself  so  free  a  hand  he  could  indulge  his  personal  tastes 
somewhat  also,  and  we  are  not  surprised  to  find  an  especial 
abundance  of  notes  on  an  account  of  the  Gowrie  Conspiracy, 
which  presented  a  perplexing  problem  in  Scottish  history. 

The  connection  of  Somers'  Tracts  with  other  things  that 
Scott  did  has  already  been  remarked  upon.1  That  he  found 
some  sort  of  stimulation  in  all  his  scholarly  employments  is 
sufficiently  evident  to  anyone  who  studies  his  work  as  a  whole, 
and  this  fact  might  well  serve  as  a  motive  for  such  study.  Yet 
it  is  only  fair  to  remember  that  Scott  was  not  a  novelist  during 
these  years  when  he  was  performing  his  most  laborious  edi- 
torial tasks.  We  are  accustomed  to  think  of  the  brilliant  use 
he  was  afterwards  to  make  of  the  knowledge  he  was  gaining, 
but  the  motives  which  influenced  him  were  those  of  the  man 
whose  interest  in  literature  and  history  makes  scholarly  work 
seem  the  most  natural  way  of  earning  money.  "  These  are 
studies,  indeed,  proverbially  dull,"  he  once  wrote,  speaking  of 
Horace  Walpole's  antiquarian  researches,  "  but  it  is  only  when 
they  are  pursued  by  those  whose  fancies  nothing  can  enliven."2 

The  Lives  of  the  Novelists,  and  Comments  on  Other  Eighteenth 
Century  Writers 

The  Novelists'  Library — Writers  discussed — Value  of  the  Lives — 
General  tone  of  competence  in  these  essays  —  Scott's  catholic  taste  — 
Points  of  special  interest  in  the  discussion  —  Relations  of  the  novel  and 
the  drama  —  Supernatural  machinery  in  novels  —  Mistakes  in  the  criti- 
cism of  Defoe  —  Realism  —  Motive  in  the  novel  —  Aim  of  the  prefaces 
— Scott's  familiarity  with  eighteenth  century  literature. 

It  has  already  been  said  that  a  large  part  of  Scott's  critical 
work  concerned  itself  with  the  eighteenth  century.  Of  his 
greater  editorial  labors  two  may  be  considered  as  belonging  to 
that  period,   for  Ballantyne's  Novelists'  Library,  though   an 

1  See  above,   p.    4.  2  Horace  Walpole,  in  Lives  of  the  Novelists. 


THE   LIVES   OF   THE    NOVELISTS  73 

enterprise  which  was  commercially  a  failure  and  which  conse- 
quently remained  incomplete,  may  from  the  point  of  view  of 
Scott's  contributions  fitly  be  compared  with  the  Dryden  and 
the  Swift.  Such  parts  as  were  published  appeared  in  1821. 
The  bulk  of  the  volumes  and  the  small  type  in  which  they  were 
printed  were  considered  to  be  the  cause  of  their  failure,  and 
it  was  not  until  the  critical  biographies  were  extracted  and  pub- 
lished separately,  by  Galignani  the  Parisian  book-seller,  in  1825, 
that  they  seem  to  have  attracted  notice. 

Scott  wrote  these  Lives  of  the  Novelists  at  a  time  when  his 
hands  were  full  of  literary  projects,  altogether  for  John  Bal- 
lantyne's  benefit.  The  author  afterwards  spoke  of  them  as 
"  rather  flimsily  written,"1  but  we  may  surmise  that  to  the  fact 
that  they  were  not  the  result  of  special  study  is  due  something 
of  their  ripeness  of  reflection  and  breadth  of  generalization. 
"  They  contain  a  large  assemblage  of  manly  and  sagacious 
remarks  on  human  life  and  manners,"2  wrote  the  Quarterly 
reviewer. 

The  writers  considered  were  all  British,  with  the  exception 
of  LeSage.  The  choice,  or  at  least  the  arrangement,  seems 
more  or  less  haphazard.  Richardson,  Fielding,  and  Smollett 
naturally  began  the  group,  and  Sterne  followed  after  an  inter- 
val. Johnson  and  Goldsmith  were  treated  briefly,  for  the 
prefaces  were  to  be  proportioned  to  the  amount  of  work  by 
each  author  included  in  the  text.  Horace  Walpole,  Clara 
Reeve,  and  Mrs.  Radcliffe  represented  the  Gothic  romance. 
Charles  Johnstone,  Robert  Bage,  and  Richard  Cumberland 
were  among  the  inferior  writers  included.  Henry  Mackenzie, 
who  was  still  living  and  was  a  personal  friend  of  Scott,  com- 
pletes the  list  so  far  as  it  went  before  the  series  was  terminated 
by  the  publisher's  death.  When  Scott's  Miscellaneous  Prose 
Works  were  collected  he  added  the  lives  of  Charlotte  Smith 
and  Defoe,  but  in  each  of  these  cases  the  biographical  portion 
was  by  another  hand,  the  criticism  being  his  own.3 

The  study  of  the  novel  as  a  genre  was  naturally  undeveloped 
at  that  time.     Dunlop's  History  of  Prose  Fiction  had  appeared 

1  Lockhart,  Vol.  III.  p.  512.  -Quarterly,  September,  1826. 

3  See  his  explanation,  in  the  articles  themselves. 


74  SCOTT   AS   A    CRITIC   OF   LITERATURE 

in  1814,  evidently  a  much  more  ambitious  attempt  than  Scott's; 
but  Scott  could  treat  the  British  novelists  with  comparative 
freedom  from  the  trammels  of  any  established  precedent.  Of 
course  his  position  as  one  who  had  struck  out  a  wonderful  new 
path  in  the  writing  of  novels  gave  to  his  reflections  on  other 
novelists  a  very  special  interest.  The  Lives  of  the  Novelists 
are  not  to  be  neglected  even  now,  and  this  is  the  more  to  be 
insisted  on  because  the  criticism  of  novels  has  been  practiced 
with  increasing  zeal  since  Scott  himself  has  become  a  classic, 
and  since  his  successors  have  made  this  field  of  literature  more 
varied  and  popular,  if  not  greater,  than  the  first  masters  made 
it.  A  recent  writer  on  eighteenth  century  literature  says :  "  By 
far  the  best  criticism  of  the  eighteenth  century  novelists  will  be 
found  in  the  prefatory  notices  contributed  by  Scott  to  Bal- 
lantyne's  Novelists'  Library."1  But  the  same  writer  adds : 
"  Sir  Walter  Scott,  indeed,  considered  Fathom  superior  to 
Jonathan  Wild,  an  opinion  which  must  always  remain  one  of 
the  mysteries  of  criticism."2 

This  comment  indicates  that  there  was  no  lack  of  assured- 
ness in  Scott's  treatment,  and  we  do  indeed  find  a  very  pleasant 
tone  of  competence  which,  though  liable  to  error  as  in  the 
exaggerated  praise  bestowed  upon  Smollett,  gives  much  of 
their  effectiveness  to  the  criticisms.  The  quality  appears  else- 
where in  Scott's  critical  work,  but  it  is  perhaps  especially 
noticeable  here.  For  example,  we  find  this  dictum :  "  There  is 
no  book  in  existence,  in  which  so  much  of  the  human  character, 
under  all  its  various  shades  and  phases,  is  described  in  so  few 
words,  as  in  the  Diable  Boiteux."3  The  illustration  is  perhaps 
a  trifle  extreme,  for  Scott  is  not  often  really  dogmatic.  From 
this  point  of  view  as  from  others  we  naturally  make  the  com- 
parison with  Johnson's  Lives  of  the  Poets,  and  we  find  that 
without  being  so  sententious,  so  admirably  compact  in  style, 
Scott  is  also  not  so  dictatorial. 

We  cannot  accuse  Scott  of  liking  any  one  kind  of  novel  to 
the   exclusion   of  others.     He   ranks    Clarissa  Harloive   very 

1  The  Mid-Eighteenth  Century,  by  J.   H.   Millar,  p.   143,   note. 

2  Ibid.,  p.  159.  Scott  compares  Fielding  and  Smollett  at  some  length  in 
the  Life  of  Smollett. 

3  Life  of  Le  Sage. 


THE   LIVES   OF  THE   NOVELISTS  75 

high;1  he  says  Tom  Jones  is  "  truth  and  human  nature  itself."2 
The  Vicar  of  Wakefield  he  calls  "one  of  the  most  delicious 
morsels  of  fictitious  composition  on  which  the  human  mind  was 
ever  employed."  "  We  return  to  it  again  and  again,"  he  says, 
"  and  bless  the  memory  of  an  author  who  contrives  so  well  to 
reconcile  us  to  human  nature."3  He  praises  Tristram  Shandy, 
calling  Uncle  Toby  and  his  faithful  Squire,  "  the  most  delightful 
characters  in  the  work,  or  perhaps  in  any  other."4  The  quiet 
fictions  of  Maria  Edgeworth  and  Jane  Austen,  the  exciting 
tales  of  Mrs.  Radcliffe,  the  sentiment  of  Sterne,  even  the  satires 
of  Bage, — all  pleased  him  in  one  way  or  another.  Scott's 
autobiography  contains  the  following  comment  on  his  boyish 
tastes  in  the  matter  of  novels :  "  The  whole  Jemmy  and  Jenny 
Jessamy  tribe  I  abhorred,  and  it  required  the  art  of  Burney, 
or  the  feeling  of  Mackenzie,  to  fix  my  attention  upon  a  domestic 
tale.  But  all  that  was  adventurous  and  romantic  I  devoured 
without  much  discrimination."5  In  later  life  he  learned  to 
exercise  his  judgment  in  regard  to  stories  of  adventure  not 
less  than  those  of  the  "  domestic  "  sort,  and  perhaps  the  liking 
for  quiet  tales  grew  upon  him ;  at  any  rate  his  taste  seems 
remarkably  catholic. 

The  most  interesting  portions  of  the  Lives  of  the  Novelists 
are  those  which  show  us,  by  the  frequent  recurrence  of  the 
same  subjects,  what  parts  of  the  theory  of  novel-writing  had 
particularly  engaged  Scott's  attention.  For  example  we  find 
him  discussing,  most  fully  in  the  Life  of  Fielding,  the  reasons 
why  a  successful  novelist  is  likely  not  to  be  a  successful  play- 
wright. The  way  in  which  he  looks  at  the  matter  suggests 
that  he  was  thinking  quite  as  much  of  the  probability  of  failure 
in  his  own  case  should,  he  begin  to  write  plays,  as  of  the  sub- 
ject of  the  memoir;  for  Fielding  wrote  his  plays  before  his 
novels,  but  the  argumenli  assumes  a  man  who  writes  good  nov- 
els first  and  bad  plays!  afterwards.  One  of  his  statements 
seems  rather  curious  and  hard  to  explain, — "  Though  a  good 
acting  play  may  be  made  by  selecting  a  plot  and  characters 
from  a  novel,  yet  scarce  any  effort  of  genius  could  render  a 

1Life  of  Richardson.  2  Life  of  Fielding. 

3  Life  of  Goldsmith.  As  we  might  expect,  Scott  speaks  rather  too  favor- 
ably  of  Goldsmith's   hack  work    in   history   and   science. 

*  Life  of  Sterne.  ^Lockhart,  Vol.  I,  p.  35. 


76  SCOTT   AS   A    CRITIC   OF   LITERATURE 

play  into  a  narrative  romance."  Perhaps  he  expected  the 
"  Terryfied  "  versions  of  Guy  Mannering  and  Rob  Roy  to  hold 
the  stage  longer  than  fate  has  permitted  them  to  do.  From 
another  point  of  view  also  he  was  interested  in  the  connection 
of  the  novel  and  the  drama.  He  felt  that  the  direction  of  the 
drama  in  the  modern  period  had  been  largely  determined  by 
the  influence  of  successful  novels ;  and  he  probably  overesti- 
mated the  effect  of  the  "  romances  of  Calprenede  and  Scuderi  " 
on  heroic  tragedy.1 

A  subject  which  recurs  even  oftener  than  that  of  the  dis- 
tinction between  drama  and  novel  is  the  question  of  supernat- 
ural machinery  in  novels.  Horace  Walpole  is  commended  for 
giving  us  ghosts  without  furnishing  explanations.  Indeed  the 
Castle  of  Otranto  is  highly  praised  ;2  but  so  also  is  Mrs.  Rad- 
cliff  e's  work,  except  on  the  one  point  of  the  attempt  to  rationalize 
mysteries.  The  kind  of  romance  which  she  "  introduced  "3  is 
compared  with  the  melodrama,  and  its  particular  mode  of  ap- 
peal is  analyzed  in  very  interesting  fashion.  In  the  Life  of 
Clara  Reeve  the  proper  treatment  of  ghosts  is  discussed  at 
length,  for  that  author  had  contended  that  ghosts  should  be 
very  mild  and  of  "  sober  demeanour."  Scott  justifies  her  prac- 
tice, but  not  her  theory,  on  the  following  grounds :  "  What  are 
the  limits  to  be  placed  to  the  reader's  credulity,  when  those  of 
common-sense  and  ordinary  nature  are  at  once  exceeded  ?  The 
question  admits  only  one  answer,  namely,  that  the  author  him- 
self, being  in  fact  the  magician,  shall  evoke  no  spirits  whom  he 
is  not  capable  of  endowing  with  manners  and  language  cor- 
responding to  their  supernatural  character." 

Scott  writes  with  much  enthusiasm  about  Defoe's  famous 
little  ghost-story,  The  Apparition  of  Mrs.  Veal,  praising  De- 
foe's wonderful  skill  in  making  the  unreal  seem  credible.  In 
connection  with  this  tale  Scott  developed  a  very  interesting 
anecdote  to  explain  the  fact  that  Drelincourt's  Defence  against 
the  Fear  of  Death  is  recommended  by  the  apparition.     "  Dre- 

1  See    above,    p.    53,    note. 

2  See  also  the  Introductory  epistle  to  Ivanhoe ;  and  the  Review  of  Wal- 
pole's  Letters.  "  In  attaining  his  contemporary  triumph,"  says  Mr.  Brander 
Matthews,  "  Scott  owed  more  to  Horace  Walpole  than  to  Maria  Edge- 
worth."     The  Historical  Novel,  p.  10. 

3  Scott  uses  the  word. 


THE   LIVES   OF   THE    NOVELISTS  77 

lincourt's  book,"  he  says,  "  being  neglected,  lay  a  dead  stock 
on  the  hands  of  the  publisher.     In  this  emergency  he  applied 

to  De  Foe  to  assist  him  (by  dint  of  such  means  as  were  then, 
as  well  as  now,  pretty  well  understood  in  the  literary  world) 
in  rescuing  the  unfortunate  hook  from  the  literary  death  to 
which  genera]  neglect  seemed  about  to  consign  it."  Scott 
goes  on  to  assert  that  the  story  was  simply  a  consummately 
clever  advertising  device.  He  may  have  found  the  germ  of 
his  hypothesis  in  a  book-seller's  tradition,  but  he  states  it  as 
an  assured  fact,  and  doubtless  believed  it  firmly  because  it 
seemed  so  beautifully  reasonable.  His  explanation  became  the 
basis  of  later  statements  on  the  subject,  and  now  obliges  every- 
one who  discusses  Defoe  to  supply  a  contradiction ;  for  the 
truth  is  that  Drelincourt's  book  was  so  highly  popular  as  to 
have  gone  through  several  editions  before  the  ghost  of  Mrs. 
Veal  mentioned  it.  Moreover,  if  Scott's  little  tale  was  ficti- 
tious, Defoe's,  on  the  other  hand,  was  really  a  reporter's  ver- 
sion of  an  experience  actually  related  by  the  person  to  whom 
he  assigns  it,  and  his  skill  in  achieving  verisimilitude  was  per- 
haps in  this  case  less  wonderful  than  his  critics  have  generally 
supposed.1 

On  the  subject  of  realism,  Scott  was  not  in  general  very 
rigid.  In  his  Life  of  Richardson  he  says :  "  It  is  unfair  to  tax 
an  author  too  severely  upon  improbabilities,  without  conceding 
which  his  story  could  have  no  existence ;  and  we  have  the  less 
title  to  do  so,  because,  in  the  history  of  real  life,  that  which  is 
actually  true  bears  often  very  little  resemblance  to  that  which 
is  probable."2     But  this  is  perhaps  only  a  plea  for  one  kind 

1  Mr.  G.  A.  Aitken  has  Riven  convincing  evidence  that  the  story  was  not 
invented  by  Defoe.  Mr.  Aitken  also  shows  the  falsity  of  Scott's  statement 
that  Drelincourt's  book  was  in  need  of  advertising,  as  William  Lee,  in  his 
Life  of  Defoe,  had  previously  done.  (See  The  Nineteenth  Century,  xxxvii : 
95,  January,  1895  ;  and  also  Aitken's  edition  of  Defoe's  Romances  and 
Narratives,  Vol.  XV,  Introduction.)  A  passage  from  Defoe's  History  of 
the  Church  of  Scotland  is  quoted  in  the  review  of  Tales  of  My  Landlord, 
by  Scott,  who  says  that  it  probably  suggested  one  of  the  scenes  in  Old 
Mortality.  Scott  there  speaks  of  Defoe's  "  liveliness  of  imagination,"  and 
says  he  "  excelled  all  others  in  dramatizing  a  story,  and  presenting  it  as 
if  in  actual  speech  and  action  before  the  reader."  {Quarterly  Reviezv, 
January,    181 7.) 

2  See  also  The  Fortunes  of  Nigel,  Vol.  II,  pp.  88-9. 


78  SCOTT   AS   A    CRITIC   OF   LITERATURE 

of  realism.  He  also  refers  to  the  question  of  historical  "  keep- 
ing," and  concludes  that  it  is  possible  to  have  so  much  accuracy 
that  the  public  will  refuse  to  be  interested,  as  Lear  would 
hardly  be  popular  on  the  stage  if  the  hero  were  represented  in 
the  bearskin  and  paint  which  a  Briton  of  his  time  doubtless 
wore.1 

The  motive  of  the  novel  is  a  subject  which  naturally  engages 
the  attention  of  the  novelist-critic.  Romantic  fiction,  he  thinks, 
may  have  sufficient  justification  if  it  acts  as  an  opiate  for  tired 
spirits.  A  significant  antithesis  between  his  point  of  view  in 
this  matter  and  the  more  common  attitude  taken  by  critics  in 
his  time  is  illustrated  by  two  reviews  of  Mrs.  Shelley's  Frank- 
enstein, to  which  we  may  refer,  though  the  book  was  later  than 
those  included  in  the  Novelists'  Library.  Scott  wrote  in  Black- 
wood's: "  We  .  .  .  congratulate  our  readers  upon  a  novel 
which  excites  new  reflections  and  untried  sources  of  emo- 
tion."2 The  Quarterly  reviewer  took  the  opposite  and  more 
conservative  attitude  and  expressed  himself  thus :  "  Our  taste 
and  our  judgment  alike  revolt  at  this  kind  of  writing,  and  the 
greater  the  ability  with  which  it  may  be  executed  the  worse  it 
is — it  inculcates  no  lesson  of  conduct,  manners,  or  morality; 
it  cannot  mend,  and  will  not  even  amuse  its  readers,  unless 
their  taste  has  been  deplorably  vitiated — it  fatigues  the  feel- 
ings without  interesting  the  understanding;  it  gratuitously 
harasses  the  heart,  and  wantonly  adds  to  the  store,  already 
too  great,  of  painful  sensations."3  In  general  Scott  minimizes 
the  effect  of  any  moral  that  may  be  expressed  in  the  novel,  but 
occasionally  he  seems  inconsistent,  when  he  is  talking  of  senti- 
ments that  are  peculiarly  distasteful  to  him.4  But  his  thesis 
is  that  "  the  direct  and  obvious  moral  to  be  deduced  from  a 
fictitious  narrative  is  of  much  less  consequence  to  the  public 
than  the  mode  in  which  the  story  is  treated  in  the  course  of 
its  details."5  In  the  Life  of  Fielding  he  says  of  novels:  "  The 
best  which  can  be  hoped  is  that  they  may  sometimes  instruct 

1  Life  of  Clara  Reeve.  2  Blackwood,  March,  1818. 

3  Quarterly,  May,   1818. 

4  See  a  reference  to  Voltaire  and  other  French  authors  ;  Napoleon,  Vol. 
I,  ch.  2. 

5  Life  of  Richardson. 


THE   LIVES    OF   THE    NOVELISTS  7!) 

the  youthful  mind  by  real  pictures  of  life,  and  sometimes 
awaken  their  better  Peelings  and  sympathies  by  strains  of 
generous  sentiment,  and  tales  of  fictitious  woe.  Beyond  this 
point  they  are  a  mere  elegance,  a  luxury  contrived  for  the 
amusement  of  polished  life." 

He  conceived  that  his  prefaces  might  he  useful  to  warn  read- 
ers against  any  ill  effects  that  might  otherwise  result  from  the 
reading  of  the  accompanying  texts ;  and  our  comments  on  the 
Lvues  of  the  Novelists  may  fitly  close  with  a  quotation  which 
shows  the  writer's  attitude  toward  the  novels  and  his  own 
criticisms  upon  them.  The  passage  is  taken  from  the  Life  of 
Bage.  "  We  did  not  think  it  proper  to  reject  the  works  of  so 
eminent  an  author  from  this  collection,  merely  on  account  of 
speculative  errors.1  We  have  done  our  best  to  place  a  mark 
on  these ;  and  as  we  are  far  from  being  of  opinion  that  the 
youngest  and  most  thoughtless  derive  their  serious  opinions 
from  productions  of  this  nature,  we  leave  them  for  our  read- 
er's amusement,  trusting  that  he  will  remember  that  a  good 
jest  is  no  argument;  that  the  novelist,  like  the  master  of  a 
puppet-show,  has  his  drama  under  his  absolute  authority,  and 
shapes  the  events  to  favour  his  own  opinions ;  and  that  whether 
the  Devil  flies  away  with  Punch,  or  Punch  strangles  the  Devil, 
forms  no  real  argument  as  to  the  comparative  power  of  either 
one  or  other,  but  only  indicates  the  special  pleasure  of  the 
master  of  the  motion." 

Scott  was  deeply  in  sympathy  with  the  literature  of  the  cen- 
tury within  which  he  was  born.  To  the  evidence  of  his  Swift 
and  of  the  Lives  of  the  Novelists  it  may  be  added  that  he  con- 
templated making  a  complete  edition  of  Pope,  and  that  he  pro- 
fessed to  like  London  and  The  Vanity  of  Human  Wishes  the 
best  of  all  poems.  James  Ballantyne  said,  rather  ambiguously, 
"  I  think  I  never  saw  his  countenance  more  indicative  of  high 

1  We  gather  from  Scott's  article  that  he  considered  the  following  to  be 
the  chief  "  speculative  errors  "  of  Bage :  he  was  an  infidel ;  he  misrepre- 
sented different  classes  of  society,  thinking  the  high  tyrannical  and  the  low 
virtuous  and  generous ;  his  system  of  ethics  was  founded  on  philosophy 
instead  of  religion  ;  he  was  inclined  to  minimize  the  importance  of  purity 
in  women  ;  he  considered  tax-gatherers  extortioners,  and  soldiers,  licensed 
murderers. 


80  SCOTT   AS   A    CRITIC    OF    LITERATURE 

admiration  than  while  reciting  aloud  from  those  productions."1 
In  one  of  his  letters  Scott  spoke  of  the  "  beautiful  and  feeling 
verses  by  Dr.  Johnson  to  the  memory  of  his  humble  friend 
Levett,  .  .  .  which  with  me,  though  a  tolerably  ardent  Scotch- 
man, atone  for  a  thousand  of  his  prejudices."2  Not  only  did 
he  admire  the  great  biography,  but  he  called  Boswell  "  such  a 
biographer  as  no  man  but  [Johnson]  ever  had,  or  ever  deserved 
to  have."3  But  he  once  said  that  many  of  the  Ramblers  were 
"  little  better  than  a  sort  of  pageant,  where  trite  and  obvious 
maxims  are  made  to  swagger  in  lofty  and  mystic  language, 
and  get  some  credit  only  because  they  are  not  understood."4 

Among  other  eighteenth  century  writers,  Addison  is  distin- 
guished by  high  praise  in  a  few  casual  references,5  but  Scott 
once  admitted  that  he  did  not  like  Addison  so  much  as  he  felt 
to  be  proper.6  A  collection  of  Prior's  poems  Scott  calls  "  an 
English  classic  of  the  first  order."7  He  speaks  of  Parnell  as 
"  an  admirable  man  and  elegant  poet,"8  and  mentions  "  the 
ponderous,  persevering,  and  laborious  dullness  of  Sir  Richard 
Blackmore."9  But  these  observations  are  of  little  importance 
except  as  they  indicate  that  Scott  had  read  the  authors  of  the 
eighteenth  century  and  acquiesced  in  the  conventional  judg- 
ments upon  them.  It  is  seldom  in  his  brief  and  casual  com- 
ments that  Scott  is  particularly  interesting  as  a  critic,  except 
when  he  is  speaking  of  living  writers,  for  he  lacked  the  gift 
of  conciseness.  When  he  has  a  large  canvas  he  is  at  his  best, 
and  this  he  has  in  the  principal  works  described  in  this  chap- 
ter:— The  Minstrelsy  of  the  Scottish  Border,  the  Works  of 
Dryden,  the  Works  of  Swift,  and  the  Lives  of  the  Novelists. 

1  Lockhart,  Vol.  II,  p.  132. 

2 Familiar  Letters,  Vol.  I,  p.  192.  In  his  George  the  Third,  Thackeray 
said :  "  Do  you  remember  the  verses — the  sacred  verses — which  Johnson 
wrote  on  the  death  of  his  humble  friend  Levett?"  (Biographical  edition 
of  Thackeray,  Vol.  VII,  p.  671.) 

3  Life  of  Johnson. 

4  Introduction  to  Chronicles  of  the  Canongate. 

5  Dryden,  Vol.  XI,  p.  81,  note;  Review  of  the  Life  and  Works  of  John 
Home,   Quarterly,  June,    1827. 

6  Familiar  Letters,  Vol.  II,  p.  44. 

7  Swift,  Vol.  XVI,  p.  275,  note.  On  one  of  the  last  sad  days  before  Sir 
Walter  left  Scotland  for  his  Italian  journey  he  quoted  in  full  Prior's  poem 
on  Mezeray's  History  of  France.      {Lockhart,  Vol.  V,  pp.  339-40.) 

8  Swift,   Vol.    Ill,   p.    36.  *  Ibid.,  Vol.  XIII,  p.  24. 


CHAPTER    IV 
Scott's  Criticism  of  his  Contemporaries 

Scott's  freedom  from  literary  jealousy— His  disapproval  of  the  typi- 
cal reviewer's  attitude— Jeffrey,  Gifford,  and  Lockhart— His  own  prac- 
tice in  regard  to  reviewing— His  informal  critical  remarks— Oppor- 
tunity for  favorable  judgments  afforded  by  the  number  of  important 
writers  in  his  period. 

Poets  —  Burns  —  Coleridge  —  Relation  of  Christabcl  to  Scott's  work 

—  Scott's   dislike    for   extreme   Romanticism  —  Wordsworth  —  Southey 

—  Scott's  review  of  Kehanta  —  Byron  —  Scott's  opinion  of  Byron's 
character  —  Campbell  —  Moore  —  Allan  Cunningham  —  Hogg  —  Crabbe 

—  Joanna  Baillie  —  Matthew  Lewis  —  Scott's  judgment  on  his  early 
taste  for  poetry  —  Absence  of  comment  on  the  work  of  Lamb,  Landor, 
Hunt,  Hazlitt,  and  DeQuincey. 

Novelists— Jane  Austen  — Maria  Edgeworth— Cooper— Personal  re- 
lations between  Scott  and  Cooper— Scott's  verdict  on  Americans  in 
general— Washington  Irving— Goethe— Fouque— Scott's  interest  in  men 
of  action. 

To  study  Scott's  relations  with  contemporary  writers  is  a 
very  pleasant  task  because  nothing  shows  better  the  greatness 
of  his  heart.  His  admirable  freedom  from  literary  jealousy 
was  an  innate  virtue  which  he  deliberately  increased  by  culti- 
vation, taking  care,  also,  never  to  subject  himself  to  the  condi- 
tions which  he  thought  accounted  for  the  faults  of  Pope,  who 
had  "  neither  the  business  nor  the  idleness  of  life  to  divide  his 
mind  from  his  Parnassian  pursuits."1  "  Those  who  have  not 
his  genius  may  be  so  far  compensated  by  avoiding  his  foibles," 
Scott  said;  and  some  years  later  he  wrote, — "When  I  first 
saw  that  a  literary  profession  was  to  be  my  fate,  I  endeavoured 
bv  all  efforts  of  stoicism  to  divest  myself  of  that  irritable  degree 
of  sensibility — or,  to  speak  plainly,  of  vanity — which  makes 
the  poetical  race  miserable  and  ridiculous."2  The  record  of 
his  life  clearly  shows  that  his  kindness  towards  other  men  of 
letters  was  not  limited  to  words.  One  who  received  his  good 
offices  has  written, — "  The  sternest  words   I  ever  heard  him 

1  Correspondence  of  C.  K.  Sharpe,  Vol.  II,  p.   194. 
-Journal,  Vol.  I,  p.  67;  Lockhart,  Vol.  IV,  p.  401. 
6  81 


82  SCOTT   AS    A    CRITIC    OF   LITERATURE 

utter  were  concerning  a  certain  poet :  '  That  man,'  he  said,  '  has 
had  much  in  his  power,  but  he  never  befriended  rising  genius 
yet.'  "1  We  may  safely  say  that  Scott  enjoyed  liking  the  work 
of  other  men.  "  I  am  most  delighted  with  praise  from  those 
who  convince  me  of  their  good  taste  by  admiring  the  genius 
of  my  contemporaries,"2  he  once  wrote  to  Southey. 

It  is  commonly  supposed  that  Scott's  amiability  led  him  into 
absurd  excesses  of  praise  for  the  works  of  his  fellow-craftsmen, 
and  indeed  he  did  say  some  very  surprising  things.  But  when 
all  his  references  to  any  one  man  are  brought  together,  they 
will  be  found,  with  a  few  exceptions,  pretty  fairly  to  charac- 
terize the  writer.  His  obiter  dicta  must  be  read  in  the  light 
of  one  another,  and  in  the  light,  also,  of  his  known  principles. 
Temperamentally  modest  about  his  own  work,  he  was  also 
habitually  optimistic,  and  the  combination  gave  him  an  utterly 
different  quality  from  that  of  the  typical  Edinburgh  or  Quar- 
terly critics. 

His  disapproval  of  their  point  of  view  he  expressed  more 
than  once.3  It  seemed  to  him  futile  and  ungentlemanly  for 
the  anonymous  reviewer  to  seek  primarily  for  faults,  or  "  to 
wound  any  person's  feelings  .  .  .  unless  where  conceit  or  false 
doctrine  strongly  calls  for  reprobation."4  "  Where  praise  can 
be  conscientiously  mingled  in  a  larger  proportion  than  blame," 
he  said,  "  there  is  always  some  amusement  in  throwing  to- 
gether our  ideas  upon  the  works  of  our  fellow-labourers." 
He  thought,  indeed,  that  vituperative  and  satiric  criticism  was 
defeating  its  own  end,  in  the  case  of  the  Edinburgh  Review, 
since  it  was  overworked  to  the  point  of  monotony.  Such 
criticism  he  considered  futile  as  well  on  this  account  as  because 

1  Allan   Cunningham's  Life  of  Scott,  p.  96. 

2Lockhart,  Vol.  I,  p.  483. 

3  See  the  satirical  paragraph  in  his  review  of  Gertrude  of  Wyoming,  on 
the  habits  of  reviewers  in  general.  "  We  are  perfectly  aware,"  he  says, 
"  that,  according  to  the  modern  canons  of  criticism,  the  Reviewer  is  ex- 
pected to  show  his  immense  superiority  to  the  author  reviewed,  and  at  the 
same  time  to  relieve  the  tediousness  of  narration,  by  turning  the  epic, 
dramatic,  moral  story  before  him  into  quaint  and  lively  burlesque."  (Quar- 
terly, May,  1809.)  In  his  review  of  the  Life  and  Works  of  John  Home 
he  speaks  of  "  the  hackneyed  rules  of  criticism,  which,  having  crushed  a 
hundred  poets,  will  never,  it  may  be  prophesied,  create,  or  assist  in  creat- 
ing, a  single  one."  (Quarterly,  June,  1827.) 
iLockhart,  Vol.  I,  p.  363. 


IMS   CRITICISM    OF    HIS   CONTEMPORARIES  s-°> 

he  thought  it  likely  to  have  an  injurious  effect  on  the  work  of 
really  gifted  writers. 

An  admirer  of  both  Jeffrey  and  Scott,  who  once  heard  a 
conversation  between  the  two  men,  has  recorded  a  distinction 
which  is  exactly  what  we  should  expect.1  lie  says:  "Jeffrey, 
for  the  most  part,  entertained  us,  when  honks  were  under  dis- 
cussion, with  the  detection  of  faults,  blunders,  absurdities,  or 
plagiarisms:  Scott  took  up  the  matter  where  he  left  it,  recalled 
some  compensating-  beauty  or  excellence  for  which  no  credit 
had  been  allowed,  and  by  the  recitation,  perhaps,  of  one  fine 
stanza,  set  the  poor  victim  on  his  legs  again." 

On  Jeffrey  Scott's  verdict  was,  "  There  is  something  in  his 
mode  of  reasoning  that  leads  me  greatly  to  doubt  whether,  not- 
withstanding the  vivacity  of  his  imagination,  he  really  has  any 
feeling  of  poetical  genius,  or  whether  he  has  worn  it  all  off  by 
perpetually  sharpening  his  wit  on  the  grindstone  of  criticism."  3 
His  comment  on  Gifford's  reviews  was  to  the  effect  that  people 
were  more  moved  to  dislike  the  critic  for  his  savagery  than  the 
guilty  victim  whom  he  flagellated.3  In  the  early  clays  of  Black- 
wood's Magazine  Scott  often  tried  to  repress  Lockhart's 
"  wicked  wit,'.'4  and  when  Lockhart  became  editor  of  the 
Quarterly  his  father-in-law  did  not  alwrays  approve  of  his 
work.  "  Don't  like  his  article  on  Sheridan's  life,"5  says  the 
Journal.  "  There  is  no  breadth  in  it,  no  general  views,  the 
whole  flung  away  in  smart  but  party  criticism.  Now,  no  man 
can  take  more  general  and  liberal  views  of  literature  than 
J.  G.  L."« 

1  Lockhart,  Vol.  I,  p.  501.  For  a  further  comparison  of  Scott  and 
Jeffrey   as   critics   see   below,   pp.    134-5. 

2  Lockhart,  Vol.   II,  p.   204.  *  Journal,  Vol.  II,  p.  262. 
*Ibid.,  Vol.  V,  p.  97.                                        bIbid.,  Vol.  I,  p.   173. 

6  In  general  Scott  admired  Lockhart.  "  I  have  known  the  most  able  men 
of  my  time,"  he  once  wrote,  "  and  I  never  met  any  one  who  had  such 
ready  command  of  his  own  mind,  and  possessed  in  a  greater  degree  the 
power  of  making  his  talents  available  upon  the  shortest  notice,  and  upon 
any  subject."  {Life  of  Murray,  Vol.  II,  p.  222.)  But  in  Lockhart's  earlier 
days  Scott  said,  "  I  am  sometimes  angry  with  him  for  an  exuberant  love 
of  fun  in  his  light  writings,  which  he  has  caught,  I  think,  from  Wilson, 
a  man  of  greater  genius  than  himself  perhaps,  but  who  disputes  with  low 
adversaries,  which  I  think  a  terrible  error,  and  indulges  in  a  sort  of  humour 
which  exceeds  the  bounds  of  playing  at  ladies  and  gentlemen,  a  game  to 
which  I  have  been  partial  all  my  life."  {Letters  of  Lady  Louisa  Stuart, 
p.  225.) 


84  SCOTT   AS    A    CRITIC    OF   LITERATURE 

With  these  opinions,  Scott  was  not  likely  often  to  undertake 
the  reviewing  of  books  that  did  not,  in  one  way  or  another, 
interest  him  or  move  his  admiration ;  and  he  would  lay  as  much 
stress  as  possible  on  their  good  points.  Gifford  told  him  that 
"  fun  and  feeling  "  were  his  forte.1  In  his  early  days  he  was 
probably  somewhat  influenced  by  Jeffrey's  method,  and  his 
articles  on  Todd's  Spenser  and  Godwin's  Life  of  Chaucer  indi- 
cate that  he  could  occasionally  adopt  something  of  the  tone  of 
the  Edinburgh  Review.  Years  afterwards  he  refused  to  write 
an  article  that  Lockhart  wanted  for  the  Quarterly,  saying,  "  I 
cannot  write  anything  about  the  author  unless  I  know  it  can 
hurt  no  one  alive  "  ;2  but  for  the  first  volume  of  the  Quarterly 
he  reviewed  Sir  John  Carr's  Caledonian  Sketches  in  a  way  that 
Sharon  Turner  seriously  objected  to,  because  it  made  Sir  John 
seem  ridiculous.3  Some  of  Scott's  critics  would  perhaps  apply 
one  of  the  strictures  to  himself :  "  Although  Sir  John  quotes 
Horace,  he  has  yet  to  learn  that  a  wise  man  should  not  admire 
too  easily;  for  he  frequently  falls  into  a  state  of  wonderment 
at  what  appears  to  us  neither  very  new  nor  very  extraordi- 
nary."4 But  if  admiration  seems  to  characterize  too  great  a 
proportion  of  Scott's  critical  work,  it  is  because  he  usually 
preferred  to  ignore  such  books  as  demanded  the  sarcastic  treat- 
ment which  he  reprehended,  but  which  he  felt  perfectly  capable 
of  applying  when  he  wished.  Speaking  of  a  fulsome  biogra- 
phy he  once  said,  "  I  can  no  more  sympathize  with  a  mere 
eulogist  than  I  can  with  a  ranting  hero  upon  the  stage;  and 
it  unfortunately  happens  that  some  of  our  disrespect  is  apt, 
rather  unjustly,  to  be  transferred  to  the  subject  of  the  pane- 
gyric in  the  one  case,  and  to  poor  Cato  in  the  other."5 

Besides  Scott's  formal  reviews,  we  find  cited  as  evidence  of 
his  extreme  amiability  his  letters,  his  journal,  and  the  remarks 
he  made  to  friends  in  moments  of  enthusiasm.  These  do  in- 
deed contain  some  sweeping  statements,  but  in  almost  every 
case  one  can  see  some  reason,  other  than  the  desire  to  be  oblig- 
ing, why  he  made  them.  He  was  not  double-faced.  One  of 
the  nearest  approaches  to  it  seems  to  have  been  in  the  case  of 

1  Familiar  Letters,  Vol.  II,  p.  400. 

2  Lang's  Lockhart,  Vol.  I,  p.  406. 

3 Life  of  Murray,  Vol.  I,  pp.   146-7. 

*  Quarterly,  February,  1809.  5  Lockhart,  Vol.   I,  p.   327. 


BIS   CRITICISM    OF    HIS  CONTEMPORARIES  85 

Miss  Seward's  poetry,  for  which  he  wrote  such  an  introduction 
as  hardly  prepares  the  reader  fur  the  remark  he  made  to  Miss 
Baillie,  that  most  of  it  was  "absolutely  execrable."  I  lis  com- 
ment in  the  edition  of  the  poems — the  publication  of  which 
Miss  Seward  really  foived  upon  him  as  a  dying  request — is 
sedulously  kind,  and  in  Waverley  he  quotes  from  her  a  couple 
of  lines  which  he  calls  "  beautiful."  But  the  essay  is  most 
carefully  guarded,  and  throughout  it  the  editor  implies  that  the 
woman  was  more  admirable  than  the  poetry.  Personally,  in- 
deed, he  seems  to  have  liked  and  admired  her.1 

The  catalogue  of  Scott's  contemporaries  is  so  full  of  impor- 
tant names  that  his  genius  for  the  enjoyment  of  other  men's 
work  had  a  wide  opportunity  to  display  itself  without  becom- 
ing absurd.  An  argument  early  used  to  prove  that  Scott  was 
the  author  of  Waverley  was  the  frequency  of  quotation  in  the 
novels  from  all  living  poets  except  Scott  himself,  and  he  felt 
constrained  to  throw  in  a  reference  or  two  to  his  own  poetry 
in  order  to  weaken  the  force  of  the  evidence.2  The  reader  is 
irresistibly  reminded  of  the  following  description,  given  by 
Lockhart  in  a  letter  to  his  wife,  of  a  morning  walk  taken  by 
Wordsworth  and  Scott  in  company:  "  The  Unknown  was  con- 
tinually quoting  Wordsworth's  Poetry  and  Wordsworth  ditto, 
but  the  great  Laker  never  uttered  one  syllable  by  which  it 
might  have  been  intimated  to  a  stranger  that  your  Papa  had 
ever  written  a  line  either  of  verse  or  prose  since  he  was  born."3 

1  Scott  wrote  a  poetical  epitaph  for  the  burial  place  of  Miss  Seward  and 
her  father.  See  Edinburgh  Annual  Register,  Vol.  II,  pt.  2.  In  the  intro- 
duction to  The  Tapestried  Chamber,  Scott  said,  "  It  was  told  to  me  many 
years  ago  by  the  late  Miss  Anna  Seward,  who,  among  other  accomplish- 
ments that  rendered  her  an  amusing  inmate  in  a  country  house,  had  that 
of  recounting  narratives  of  this  sort  with  very  considerable  etTect ;  much 
greater,  indeed,  than  anyone  would  be  apt  to  guess  from  the  style  of  her 
written  performances."  It  must  be  remembered  that  Miss  Seward  was 
one  of  the  first  persons  of  any  literary  note,  outside  of  Edinburgh,  to  show 
an  interest  in  Scott's  work,  and  he  committed  himself  to  admiration  of  her 
poetry  when  he  was  still  in  a  rather  uncritical  stage.  In  regard  to  his 
later  feeling  about  her  see  Recollections,  by  R.  P.  Gillies,  Frascr's,  xiii : 
692,  January,   1836. 

2 J.  L.  Adolphus,  in  an  interesting  passage  in  his  Letters  to  Hebcr  on 
the  Authorship  of  Waverley,  noted  many  of  the  references  to  contemporary 
poets.  See  pp.  53-4.  See  also  Hazlitt's  Spirit  of  the  Age.  art.  Sir  Walter 
Scott. 

3Familiar  Letters,  Vol.  II,  p.  341.  See  also  a  similar  anecdote  in  For- 
ster's  Life  of  Landor,  Vol.  II,  p.  244. 


86  SCOTT   AS    A    CRITIC    OF    LITERATURE 

Scott's  opinions  in  regard  to  his  fellow  craftsmen  may  best 
be  given  largely  in  his  own  words — words  which  cannot  fail 
to  be  interesting,  however  little  evidence  they  show  of  any 
attempt  to  make  them  quotable. 

In  considering  Scott's  estimation  of  his  contemporaries  it  is 
chronologically  proper  to  mention  Burns  first.  As  a  boy  of 
fifteen  Scott  met  Burns,  an  event  which  filled  him  with  the 
suitable  amount  of  awe.  He  was  most  favorably  impressed 
with  the  poet's  appearance  and  with  everything  in  his  manner. 
The  boy  thought,  however,  that  "  Burns'  acquaintance  with 
English  poetry  was  rather  limited,  and  also,  that  having  twenty 
times  the  abilities  of  Allan  Ramsay  and  of  Ferguson,  he  talked 
of  them  with  too  much  humility  as  his  models."1  Scott's 
admiration  of  Burns  was  always  expressed  in  the  highest  and, 
if  one  may  say  so,  the  most  affectionate  terms.  He  refused  to 
let  himself  be  named  "  in  the  same  day  "  with  Burns.2  "  Long 
life  to  thy  fame  and  peace  to  thy  soul,  Rob  Burns !  "  he  ex- 
claimed, in  his  Journal;  "  when  I  want  to  express  a  sentiment 
which  I  feel  strongly,  I  find  the  phrase  in  Shakespeare — or 
thee."3  On  another  day  he  compared  Burns  with  Shakspere 
as  excelling  all  other  poets  in  "  the  power  of  exciting  the  most 
varied  and  discordant  emotions  with  such  rapid  transitions."4 
Again,  "  The  Jolly  Beggars,  for  humorous  description  and  nice 
discrimination  of  character,  is  inferior  to  no  poem  of  the  same 
length  in  the  whole  range  of  English  poetry."5  Scott  wished 
that  Burns  might  have  carried  out  his  plan  of  dramatic  com- 
position, and  regretted,  from  that  point  of  view,  the  excessive 
labor  at  songs  which  in  the  nature  of  things  could  not  all  be 
masterpieces.5 

Of  writers  who  were  more  precisely  contemporaries  of  Scott, 
the  Lake  Poets  and  Byron  are  the  most  important.  The  prece- 
dence ought  to  be  given  to  Coleridge  because  of  the  suggestion 
Scott  caught  from  a  chance  recitation  of  Christabel  for  the 

1Lockhart,  Vol.  I,  pp.   1 16-17.  2Ibid.,  Vol.  II,  p.  132. 

^Journal,  Vol.  I,  p.   321. 

4  Review  of  Cromek's  Reliques  of  Burns,  Quarterly,  February,   1809. 

bIbid. 


HIS   CRITICISM    OF    HIS   CONTEMPORARIES  87 

meter  he  made  s<>  popular  in  the  Lay.*  Fragments  from 
Christabel  arc  quoted  or  alluded  to  so  often  in  the  novels2  and 
throughout  Scott's  work  that  we  should  conclude  it  had  made 
a  greater  impression  upon  him  than  any  other  single  poem 
written  in  his  own  time,  if  Lockhart  had  not  spoken  of  Words- 
worth's sonnet  on  Neidpath  Castle  as  one  which  Scott  was 
perhaps  fondest  of  quoting."  Christabel  is  not  the  only  one 
of  Coleridge's  poems  which  Scott  used  for  allusion  or  refer- 
ence, but  it  was  the  favorite.  "  He  is  naturally  a  grand  poet," 
Scott  once  wrote  to  a  friend.  "  His  verses  on  Love,  I  think, 
are  among  the  most  beautiful  in  the  English  language.  Let 
me  know  if  you  have  seen  them,  as  I  have  a  copy  of  them  as 
they  stood  in  their  original  form,  which  was  afterwards  altered 
for'  the  worse."4  The  Ancient  Mariner  also  made  a  decided 
impression  on  him,  if  we  judge  from  the  fact  that  he  quoted 

*Crabbe  Robinson,  in  his  diary  (quoted  by  Knight  in  his  edition  of 
Wordsworth,  Vol.  X,  p.  189),  says  that  Coleridge  and  his  friends  "con- 
sider Scott  as  having  stolen  the  verse"  of  Christabel.  On  this  point  see 
also  a  letter  by  Coleridge,  given  in  Meteyard's  Group  of  Englishmen,  pp. 
327-8.  In  1807  Coleridge  wrote  to  Southey :  "I  did  not  over-hugely 
admire  the  '  Lay  of  the  Last  Minstrel,'  but  saw  no  likeness  whatever  to 
the  '  Christabel,'  much  less  any  improper  resemblance."  (Letters  of  Cole- 
ridge, ed.  by  E.  H.  Coleridge,  Vol.  II,  p.  523-)  Yet  Mr.  Lang  seems  to 
think  that  in  this  matter  Scott  "  showed  something  of  the  deficient  sense 
of  meum  and  tuum  which  marked  his  freebooting  ancestors."  (Sir  Walter 
Scott  p  36.)  Apparently  Scott  never  dreamed  that  the  matter  could  be 
looked  at  in  this  way.  In  Lockhart's  Scott  (Vol.  II,  pp.  77-8)  we  find 
described  an  occasion  on  which  the  two  men  once  met  in  London,  when 
they  were  asked,  with  other  poets  who  were  present,  to  recite  from  their 
unpublished  writings.  Coleridge  complied  with  the  request,  but  Scott  said 
he  had  nothing  of  his  own  and  would  repeat  some  stanzas  he  had  seen 
in  a  newspaper.  The  poem  was  criticised  adversely  in  spite  of  Scott's 
protests,  till  Coleridge  lost  patience  and  exclaimed,  "  Let  Mr.  Scott  alone ; 
I  wrote  the  poem."     Coleridge's  lines : 

"  The  Knight's  bones  are  dust 
And  his  good  sword  rust, 
His  soul  is  with  the  saints,  I  trust," 
are   probably   much   better   known   as   they   appear    in    Ivanhoe,    incorrectly 
quoted,  than  in  their  proper  form.     Scott  also  added  a  note  on   Coleridge 
in  this  connection.     (Ivanhoe,  Chapter  VIII.) 

2  But  apparently  not  in  any  earlier  than  The  Black  Dwarf,  which  was 
written  in  1816,  the  year  in  which  the  poem  was  published.  It  was  about 
1803  that  Scott   heard   Christabel   recited.     See  Familiar   Letters,   Vol.    II, 

P'  *Lockhart,  Vol.  I,  p.  356.  'Familiar  Letters,  Vol.  I,  p.  31S- 


88  SCOTT   AS   A    CRITIC    OF   LITERATURE 

from  it  several  times.1  Scott  evidently  felt  that  Coleridge  was 
a  most  tantalizing  poet,  and  once  intimated  that  future  genera- 
tions would  in  regard  to  him  feel  something  like  Milton's  desire 
"  to  call  up  him  who  left  half  told  the  story  of  Cambuscan 
bold."2  "  No  man  has  all  the  resources  of  poetry  in  such 
profusion,  but  he  cannot  manage  them  so  as  to  bring  out  any- 
thing of  his  own  on  a  large  scale  at  all  worthy  of  his  genius. 
.  .  .  His  fancy  and  diction  would  have  long  ago  placed  him 
above  all  his  contemporaries,  had  they  been  under  the  direction 
of  a  sound  judgment  and  a  steady  will."3  Such,  in  effect,  was 
the  opinion  that  Scott  always  expressed  concerning  Coleridge, 
and  it  is  practically  that  of  posterity.  In  The  Monastery  Cole- 
ridge is  called  "  the  most  imaginative  of  our  modern  bards." 
In  another  connection,  after  speaking  of  the  "  exquisite  powers 
of  poetry  he  has  suffered  to  remain  uncultivated,"  Scott  adds, 
"  Let  us  be  thankful  for  what  we  have  received,  however. 
The  unfashioned  ore,  drawn  from  so  rich  a  mine,  is  worth  all 
to  which  art  can  add  its  highest  decorations,  when  drawn  from 
less  abundant  sources."4  These  remarks  are  worth  quoting, 
not  only  because  of  their  wisdom,  but  also  because  Scott  had 
small  personal  acquaintance  with  Coleridge  and  was  rather 
repelled  than  attracted  by  what  he  knew  of  the  character  of 
the  author  of  Christabel.  His  praises  cannot  in  this  case  be 
called  the  tribute  of  friendship,  and  his  own  remarkable  power 
of  self-control  might  have  made  him  a  stern  judge  of  Cole- 
ridge's shortcomings. 

One  of  his  most  interesting  comments  on  Coleridge  is 
contained  in  a  discussion  of  Byron's  Darkness,  a  poem  which 
to  his  mind  recalled  "  the  wild,  unbridled,  and  fiery  imagina- 
tion of  Coleridge."5  Darkness  is  characterized  as  a  mass  of 
images  and  ideas,  unarranged,  and  the  critic  goes  on  to  warn 
the  author  against  indulging  in  this  sort  of  poetry.  He  says : 
"The  feeling  of  reverence  which  we  entertain  for  that  which 

1  See  Letters  to  Heber,  p.  293;  On  Imitations  of  the  Ancient  Ballad; 
Lockhart,  Vol.  Ill,  pp.  56  and  264;   Quentin  Durward,  Vol.  II,  p.  394. 

-  Note  in  The  Abbot.  3 Lockhart,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  223. 

4  Note  in  St.  Ronan's  Well.  See  also  the  comment  on  Wallenstein  in 
Paul's  Letters,  Letter  XV. 

5 Review  of  Childe  Harold,  Canto  III,   Quarterly,  October,  1816. 


IMS   CRITICISM    OF    HIS   CONTEMPORARIES  89 

is  difficult  of  comprehension,  gives  way  to  weariness  whenever 
we  begin  to  suspect  that  it  cannot  be  distinctly  comprehended 

by  anyone.  .  .  .  The  strength  of  poetical  conception  and  beauty 
of  diction  bestowed  upon  such  prolusions  [sic],  is  as  much 
thrown  away  as  the  colors  of  a  painter,  could  he  take  a  cloud 
of  mist  or  a  wreath  of  smoke  for  his  canvas."  It  is  disap- 
pointing that  we  have  no  comment  from  Scott  upon  Shelley's 
poetry,  but  we  can  imagine  what  is  would  have  been.1  Scott's 
position  as  the  great  popularizer  of  the  Romantic  movement 
in  poetry  makes  particularly  interesting  his  very  evident  though 
not  often  expressed  repugnance  to  the  more  extreme  develop- 
ment of  that  movement. 

Wordsworth's  peculiar  theory  of  poetry  seemed  to  Scott 
superfluous  and  unnecessary,  though  he  was  never,  so  far  as 
we  can  judge,  especially  irritated  by  it.2  Of  Wordsworth  and 
Southey  he  wrote  to  Miss  Seward:  "  Were  it  not  for  the  unfor- 
tunate idea  of  forming  a  new  school  of  poetry,  these  men  are 
calculated  to  give  it  a  new  impulse ;  but  I  think  they  sometimes 
lose  their  energy  in  trying  to  find  not  a  better  but  a  different 
path  from  what  has  been  travelled  by  their  predecessors."3 
Scott  paid  tribute  in  the  introduction  to  The  Antiquary  to  as 
much  of  Wordsworth's  poetical  creed  as  he  could  acquiesce  in 
when  he  said,  "  The  lower  orders  are  less  restrained  by  the 
habit  of  suppressing  their  feelings,  and  ...  I  agree  with  my 
friend  Wordsworth  that  they  seldom  fail  to  express  them  in 
the  strongest  and  most  powerful  language."  In  a  letter  to 
Southey  Scott  calls  Wordsworth  "  a  great  master  of  the  pas- 

1  In  1818  Scott  wrote  a  review  of  Frankenstein  in  which  it  appears  that 
he  thought  Shelley  was  the  author.  Shelley  had  sent  the  book  with  a  note 
in  which  he  said  that  it  was  the  work  of  a  friend  and  he  had  merely  seen 
it  through  the  press  ;  and  Scott  took  this  for  the  conventional  evasion  so 
often  resorted  to  by  authors.  (See  Mr.  Lang's  note  in  his  Introduction  to 
the  Waverley  Novels,  p.  lxxxvi.)  Scott  praises  the  substance  and  style  of 
the  book,  and  advises  the  author  to  cultivate  his  poetical  powers,  in  words 
which  make  it  evident  that  he  did  not  know  Shelley  as  a  poet,  though 
Alastor  had  appeared  in  1816.  Scott  also  praises  Frankenstein  in  his  article 
on  Hoffmann.  In  reading  Scott's  novels  I  have  noted  two  reminiscences 
of  the  line,  "  One  word  is  too  often  profaned."  They  are  to  be  found  in 
Old  Mortality,  Vol.  II,  p.  93,  and  in  Redganntlct,  Vol.  I,  p.  224. 

2 Journal,  Vol.  II,  p.  179.  ^Familiar  Letters,  Vol.  I,  p.  40. 


90  SCOTT    AS    A    CRITIC    OF    LITERATURE 

sions,"1  and  in  his  Journal  he  said:  His  imagination  "  is  natur- 
ally exquisite,  and  highly  cultivated  by  constant  exercise."2 
At  another  time  he  compared  Wordsworth  and  Southey  as 
scholars  and  commented  on  the  "  freshness,  vivacity,  and 
spring  "  of  Wordsworth's  mind.3 

The  personal  relations  between  Scott  and  Wordsworth  were, 
as  Wordsworth's  tribute  in  Yarrow  Revisited  would  indicate, 
those  of  affectionate  intimacy.  And  if  Scott  took  exception 
to  Wordsworth's  choice  of  subjects  and  manner,  Wordsworth 
used  the  same  freedom  in  disagreeing  with  Scott's  poetical 
ideals.  "  Thank  you,"  he  wrote  in  1808,  "  for  Marmion,  which 
I  have  read  with  lively  pleasure.  I  think  your  end  has  been 
attained.  That  it  is  not  in  every  respect  the  end  which  I  should 
wish  you  to  purpose  to  yourself,  you  will  be  well  aware,  from 
what  you  know  of  my  notions  of  composition,  both  as  to  matter 
and  manner."4  When,  in  1821,  Chantrey  was  about  to  exhibit 
together  his  busts  of  the  two  poets,  Scott  wrote:  "  I  am  happy 
my  effigy  is  to  go  with  that  of  Wordsworth,  for  (differing 
from  him  in  very  many  points  of  taste)  I  do  not  know  a  man 
more  to  be  venerated  for  uprightness  of  heart  and  loftiness  of 
genius.  Why  he  will  sometimes  choose  to  crawl  upon  all 
fours,  when  God  has  given  him  so  noble  a  countenance  to  lift 
to  heaven,  I  am  as  little  able  to  account  for  as  for  his  quar- 
relling (as  you  tell  me)  with  the  wrinkles  which  time  and 
meditation  have  stamped  his  brow  withal."5 

These  remarks  upon  Wordsworth  and  Coleridge  touch  merely 
the  fringe  of  the  subject,  and  indeed  we  do  not  find  that  Scott 
exercised  any  such  sublimated  ingenuity  in  appreciating  these 
men  as  has  often  been  considered  essential.  We  can  see  that 
he  admired  certain  parts  of  their  work  intensely,  but  we  look 
in  vain  for  any  real  analysis  of  their  quality.  But  as  he  never 
had  occasion  to  write  essays  upon  their  poetry,  it  is  perhaps 
hardly  fair  to  expect  anything  more  than  the  general  remarks 

1  Familiar  Letters,  Vol.    I,   p.    97.  2  Journal,  Vol.  I,  p.  333. 

*Ibid.,  Vol.  II,  p.  190. 

4 1  quote  from  the  letter  as  given  in  Knight's  Wordszvorth,  Vol.  X,  p. 
105.  Prof.  Knight  says  that  Lockhart  quotes  the  letter  less  exactly. 
{Lockhart,  Vol.  I,  p.  489.) 

^Lockhart,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  428. 


IMS    CRITICISM    OF    HIS    CONTKMl'ORAKIILS  1)1 

that    we   actually   do    find,   and   as   far   as   they  go   they   are 
satisfactory. 

Like  most  of  his  distinguished  contemporaries,  Scott  held 
the  work  of  Southey  in  surprisingly  high  estimation.1  Southey, 
more  than  anyone  else  except  Wordsworth,  and  more  than 
Wordsworth  in  some  ways,  was  the  "  real  poet  "  of  the  period, 
devoting  his  whole  heart  to  literature  and  his  whole  time  to 
literary  pursuits.  Scott  commented  on  the  fact,  saying, 
"  Southey 's  ideas  are  all  poetical,"  and,  "  In  this  respect,  as 
well  as  in  many  others,  he  is  a  most  striking  and  interesting 
character."2  Nevertheless  Scott  found  it  easy  to  criticise 
Souther's  poems  adversely,  as  we  may  see  from  his  correspon- 
dence. Writing  to  Miss  Seward  he  pointed  out  flaws  in  the 
story  and  the  characterization  of  Madoc,3  yet  after  repeated 
readings  he  saw  enough  to  convince  him  that  Madoc  would  in 
the  future  "  assume  his  real  place  at  the  feet  of  Milton."4 
Thalaba  was  one  of  the  poems  he  liked  to  have  read  aloud  on 
Sunday  evenings.5  A  review  of  The  Curse  of  Kehama,  in 
which  he  seemed  to  express  the  opinion  that  this  surpassed  the 
poet's  previous  work,  illustrates  his  professed  creed  as  to  criti- 
cism. He  wrote  to  Ellis  concerning  his  article :  "  What  I  could 
I  did,  which  was  to  throw  as  much  weight  as  possible  upon 
the  beautiful  passages,  of  which  there  are  many,  and  to  slur 
over  the  absurdities,  of  which  there  are  not  a  few.  .  .  .  This 
said  Kehama  affords  cruel  openings  for  the  quizzers,  and  I 
suppose  will  get  it  roundly  in  the  Edinburgh  Revieiv.     I  could 

1  Even  Byron  admired  Southey.  He  once  wrote,  "  His  prose  is  perfect. 
Of  his  poetry  there  are  various  opinions  :  there  is,  perhaps,  too  much  of  it 
for  the  present  generation  ;  posterity  will  probably  select.  He  has  passages 
equal  to  anything."  (Byron's  Letters  and  Journals,  ed.  Prothero,  Vol.  II, 
p.  331.)  Shelley  also  had  a  high  opinion  of  Southey's  work.  (Dowden's 
Life  of  Shelley,  Vol.  I,  p.  158,  and  pp.  471-2.)  Landor  liked  Madoc  and 
Thalaba  so  much  that,  when  he  found  Southey  hesitating  to  write  more 
poems  of  a  similar  kind  because  they  did  not  pay,  he  offered  to  bear  the 
expense  of  the  publication.  Southey  refused  the  assistance,  but  was  stimu- 
lated by  the  kindness  and  considered  Landor's  encouragement  responsible 
for  his  later  work  in  poetry.  (Forster's  Life  of  Landor,  Vol.  I,  pp.  209- 
214.) 

2Lockhart,  Vol.  II,  p.   307-  3 Ibid.,  Vol.   I.  p.  415. 

4Ibid.,  Vol.  I,  p.  477;  see  also  Edinburgh  Annual  Register  for  1809,  part 
2,  p.  588. 

bLockhart,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  197. 


92  SCOTT   AS    A    CRITIC    OF    LITERATURE 

have  made  a  very  different  hand  of  it,  indeed,  had  the  order 
of  the  day  been  pour  dcchirer."1  If  Scott  had  to  make  an« 
effort  in  writing  the  review,  he  made  it  with  abundant  energy. 
Some  absurdities  are  indeed  mentioned,  but  various  particular 
passages  are  characterized  in  the  most  enthusiastic  way,  with 
such  phrases  as  "horribly  sublime,"  "impressive  and  affecting," 
"  reminds  us  of  the  Satan  of  Milton,  yet  stands  the  compari- 
son," "  all  the  gloomy  power  of  Dante."  It  may  be  noted  that 
Scott  used  Milton's  name  rather  freely  in  comparisons,  and 
that  for  Dante  his  admiration  was  altogether  unimpassioned,2 
but  the  review,  after  all,  is  on  the  whole  very  laudatory.3  In 
it  Scott  awards  to  Southey  the  palm  for  a  surpassing  share  of 
imagination,  which  he  elsewhere  gave  to  Coleridge.  Possibly 
Scott  was  the  less  inclined  to  be  severe  over  the  absurdities  of 
Kehama  because  Southey  agreed  with  his  own  theory  as  to 
the  evil  of  fastidious  corrections.4  At  any  rate  he  seems  to 
have  been  quite  sincere  in  saying  to  Southey,  in  connection 
with  the  poet-laureateship  which,  according  to  Scott's  sugges- 
tion, was  offered  to  him  in  1813,  "I  am  not  such  an  ass  as 
not  to  know  that  you  are  my  better  in  poetry,  though  I  have 
had,  probably  but  for  a  time,  the  tide  of  popularity  in  my 
favour."5 

Much  as  Scott  admired  Southey,  Wordsworth,  and  Cole- 
ridge, he  considered  Byron  the  great  poetical  genius  of  the 

1  Lockhart,  Vol.  II,  p.   127. 

2  In  his  youth  Scott  read  Dante  with  other  Italian  authors,  but  he  did 
not  become  well  acquainted  with  him,  and  later  even  expressed  dislike  for 
his  work.  (See  Lockhart,  Vol.  V,  p.  408.)  In  1825  he  wrote  to  W.  S. 
Rose,  "  I  will  subscribe  for  Dante  with  all  pleasure,  on  condition  you  do 
not  insist  on  my  reading  him."     (Fain.  Let.,  Vol.  II,  p.  356.) 

3  It  may  be  interesting  to  have  Southey's  comment  on  the  same  article. 
(See  Southey's  Letters,  Vol.  II,  p.  307.)  He  says,  "  Bedford  has  seen  the 
review  which  Scott  has  written  of  it,  and  which,  from  his  account,  though 
a  very  friendly  one,  is,  like  that  of  the  '  Cid,'  very  superficial.  He  sees 
nothing  but  the  naked  story ;  the  moral  feeling  which  pervades  it  has 
escaped  him.  I  do  not  know  whether  Bedford  will  be  able  to  get  a  para- 
graph interpolated  touching  upon  this,  and  showing  that  there  is  some 
difference  between  a  work  of  high  imagination  and  a  story  of  mere  amuse- 
ment." Either  Bedford  was  mistaken  in  saying  that  Scott  had  ignored  the 
moral  aspect  of  the  poem,  or  else  he  succeeded  in  getting  a  passage  inter- 
polated, for  the  review  is  sufficiently  definite  on  that  point. 

*Lockhart,  Vol.  I,  p.  481.  5  Ibid.,  Vol.  II,  p.  296. 


His   CRITICISM   OF    BIS  CONTEMPORARIES  93 

period.  1  [e  once  spoke  of  Byron  as  the  only  poet  of  transcen- 
dent talents  thai  England  had  had  since  Dryden.1  At  another 
time  his  comment  was:  "  lie  wrote  from  impulse,  never  from 
effort;  and  therefore  I  have  always  reckoned  Burns  and  Iiyron 
the  most  genuine  poetical  geniuses  of  my  time,  and  half  a 
century  before  me.  We  have  .  .  .  many  men  of  high  poetical 
talent,  but  none,  I  think,  of  that  ever-gushing  and  perennial 
fountain  of  natural  water."2  The  likenesses  between  Byron's 
poetical  manner  and  Scott's  own  must  have  made  it  easy  for 
the  elder  poet  to  recognize  the  power  of  the  younger,  since 
Scott  was  innocent  of  all  repining  or  envy  over  the  fact  which 
he  so  freely  acknowledged  in  later  years,  that  Iiyron  "  beat " 
him  out  of  the  field.3  From  the  time  of  the  appearance  of  the 
first  two  cantos  of  Childe  Harold  he  acknowledged  the  author's 
"extraordinary  power,"4  and  even  before  that  he  had  tried  to 
soften  Jeffrey's  harsh  treatment  of  Hours  of  Idleness.5  In 
1814  he  was  ready  to  say,  "  Byron  hits  the  mark  where  I  don't 
even  pretend  to  fledge  my  arrow."6 

It  was  Byron,  rather  than  Scott,  who  realized  the  debt  of 
the  new  popular  favorite  to  the  old ;  and  their  personal  rela- 
tions were  of  the  pleasantest,  though  they  were  never  intimate 
as  Scott  was  with  Southey  and  Wordsworth.  As  poets,  Scott 
and  Byron  seem  to  have  understood  each  other  thoroughly.7 
None  of  the  other  great  poets  of  the  period  did  justice  to 
Scott,  nor  did  he  succeed  so  well  in  defining  the  power  of  any 
of  the  others.  His  first  review  of  Childe  Harold  is  the  most 
important  of  all  his  articles  on  the  poetry  of  his  time ;  and 
his  remarks  written  at  the  death  of  Lord  Byron,  though  brief, 
are  not  less  full  of  good  judgment.  Originality,  spontaneity, 
and  the  ability  and  inclination  to  write  rapidly  were  traits  Scott 
admired  most  in  Byron,  and  in  the  vigor  and  beauty  of  the 

1  Lockhart.   Vol.   V,   p.   413. 

2  Journal,  Vol.  I,  p.  112;  Lockhart,  Vol.  IV,  p.  429. 

3  Lockhart,  Vol.  V,  p.  391.  *  Ibid.,   Vol.    II.   p.    211. 
5  Introduction  to  Marmion ;  Lockhart,  Vol.  II,  p.  82. 
^Lockhart,  Vol.  II,  p.  508. 

"Byron  did  not  altogether  approve  of  Scott's  poetry,  but  he  felt  its 
effectiveness.  In  his  "  Reply  to  Blackwood's  Edinburgh  Magazine,"  Byron 
wrote :  "  What  have  we  got  instead  [of  following  Pope]  ?  A  deluge  of 
flimsy  and  unintelligible  romances,  imitated  from  Scott  and  myself,  who 
have  both  made  the  best  of  our  bad  materials  and  erroneous  system." 


94  SCOTT   AS   A   CRITIC   OF   LITERATURE 

poems  he  found  the  fine  flower  of  all  these  qualities.  "  We 
cannot  but  repeat  our  conviction,"  he  says,  "  that  poetry,  being, 
in  its  higher  classes,  an  art  which  has  for  its  elements  sublimity 
and  unaffected  beauty,  is  more  liable  than  any  other  to  suffer 
from  the  labour  of  polishing.  ...  It  must  be  remembered  that 
we  speak  of  the  higher  tones  of  composition;  there  are  others 
of  a  subordinate  character  where  extreme  art  and  labour  are 
not  bestowed  in  vain.  But  we  cannot  consider  over-anxious 
correction  as  likely  to  be  employed  with  advantage  upon  poems 
like  those  of  Lord  Byron,  which  have  for  their  object  to  rouse 
the  imagination  and  awaken  the  passions."1 

Byron's  temperament  was  far  from  being  of  a  sort  that  Scott 
could  admire,  though  he  was  very  susceptible  to  his  personal 
charm :  "  Byron's  countenance  is  a  thing  to  dream  of,"  he  once 
said  ;2  but  he  felt  that  popular  estimation  did  Byron  injustice. 
His  articles  on  this  poet  contain  some  of  his  most  characteristic 
moral  reflections.  Something  of  Byron's  gloominess  Scott 
attributes  to  the  sensitive  poetic  organization  which  he  felt  that 
Byron  had  in  an  extreme  degree ;  but  more  to  the  perverted 
habit  of  looking  within  rather  than  around  upon  the  realities 
of  life,  in  which  Providence  intended  men  to  find  their  happi- 
ness. The  philosophy  is  not  novel  or  brilliant ;  it  is  only  very 
sincere  and  very  just;  and  it  supplies  to  Scott's  criticism  of 
Byron  that  element  of  moral  reflection  which  we  feel  was  nec- 
essary to  the  occasion.3 

1  Review  of  Childe  Harold,  Canto  III,   Quarterly,  October,    1816. 

*Lockhart,  Vol.   Ill,  p.   182. 

3 It  should  be  remembered  also  that  Scott's  first  review  of  Childe  Harold 
appeared  at  a  time  when  all  England  was  condemning  Byron  for  his  treat- 
ment of  Lady  Byron,  and  that  the  article  was  thought  by  many  to  be  alto- 
gether too  lenient.  Byron  wrote  to  Murray  expressing  his  pleasure  in  the 
review  before  he  knew  who  was  responsible  for  it,  and  some  years  later 
he  wrote  to  Scott  as  follows :  "  To  have  been  recorded  by  you  in  such  a 
manner  would  have  been  a  proud  memorial  at  any  time,  but  at  such  a 
time  .  .  .  was  something  still  higher  to  my  self-esteem.  .  .  .  Had  it  been 
a  common  criticism,  however  eloquent  or  panegyrical,  I  should  have  felt 
pleased,  undoubtedly,  and  grateful,  but  not  to  the  extent  which  the  extra- 
ordinary good-heartedness  of  the  whole  proceeding  must  induce  in  any 
mind  capable  of  such  sensations."  {Byron's  Letters  and  Journals,  Vol. 
VI,  p.  2.)  See  Lockhart,  Vol.  II,  p.  510,  for  quotations  from  Byron  show- 
ing his  admiration  for  Scott.  An  interesting  contrast  between  the  charac- 
ters of  the  two  poets  is  drawn  by  H.  S.  Legare.  (See  his  Collected  Writ- 
ings, Vol.  II,  p.  258.) 


INS    CKITICISM    OF    HIS    CONTEMPORARIES  95 

But  though  Scott  never  failed  to  express  disapproval  of 
Byron's  attitude  toward  life,  he  kept  his  criticism  on  this  point 
essentially  distinct  from  his  judgment  on  the  poetry.  In  a 
way  it  was  impossible  to  separate  the  two  subjects,  and  the 
public  demanded  some  discussion  of  the  man  when  his  poetry 
was  reviewed.  But  Scott's  verdict  on  the  importance  of  the 
poems  as  such  was  unaffected  by  his  disapproval  of  the  author's 
point  of  view.  He  praised  Don  Juan  no  less  heartily  than 
Child c  Harold. 

His  criticism  of  Don  Juan  is,  however,  to  be  gathered  only 
from  short  and  incidental  remarks,  as  he  never  reviewed  the 
poem.  A  satire  written  by  R.  P.  Gillies  is  commemorated  thus 
in  Scott's  Journal:  "  This  poem  goes  to  the  tune  of  Don  Juan, 
but  it  is  the  champagne  after  it  has  stood  two  days  with  the 
cork  drawn."1  He  called  Byron  "  as  various  in  composition 
as  Shakspeare  himself  " ;  and  added,  "  this  will  be  admitted  by 
all  who  are  acquainted  with  his  Don  Juan.  .  .  .  Neither  Child e 
Harold,  nor  any  of  the  most  beautiful  of  Byron's  earlier  tales, 
contain  more  exquisite  morsels  of  poetry  than  are  to  be  found 
scattered  through  the  cantos  of  Don  Juan/'2  The  defence  of 
Cain  which  Scott  wrote  in  accepting  the  dedication  of  that 
poem  to  himself  is  well  known.3  He  calls  it  a  "  very  grand 
and  tremendous  drama,"  and  continues,  "  Byron  has  certainly 
matched  Milton  on  his  own  ground.  Some  part  of  the  lan- 
guage is  bold,  and  may  shock  one  class  of  readers,  whose  tone 
will  be  adopted  by  others  out  of  affectation  or  envy.  But  then 
they  must  condemn  the  Paradise  I^ost,  if  they  have  a  mind 
to  be  consistent." 

Scott's  comments  on  Byron  are  closely  paralled  by  those  of 
Goethe,  who  considered  that  Byron  had  the  greatest  talent  of 
any  man  of  his  century.4  The  opinions  of  continental  critics 
in  general  were  similar.  Among  English  critics  Matthew 
Arnold  aroused  many  protests  when  he  ranked  Byron  as  one 
of  the  two  greatest  English  poets  of  the  nineteenth  century, 

1  Journal,  Vol.  I,  p.   221.  2 Remarks  on  the  Death  of  Lord  Byron. 

3Lockhart,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  525. 

4 See  Nichol's  Byron  (English  Men  of  Letters),  p.  205;  and  Arnold's 
essay  on  Byron. 


96  SCOTT   AS   A   CRITIC   OF   LITERATURE 

but  his  views  seem  perfectly  rational  now;  and  though  he 
remarked  upon  the  extravagance  of  Scott's  phrases  his  own 
verdict  was  not  very  unlike  that  we  have  been  considering. 

Scott's  enthusiasm  about  the  literature  of  his  own  time  seems 
natural  enough  when  we  consider  that  the  list  of  his  notable 
contemporaries  is  far  from  exhausted  after  Burns,  the  Lake 
Poets,  and  Byron  have  been  named.  Campbell  was  a  poet  of 
whose  powers  he  thought  very  highly,  but  who,  he  believed, 
had  given  only  a  sample  of  the  great  things  he  might  do  if 
he  would  cease  to  "  fear  the  shadow  of  his  own  reputation." 
Before  he  wrote  about  Byron  Scott  had  given  in  his  review  of 
Gertrude  of  Wyoming  an  exposition  of  his  opinion  as  to  the 
dangers  of  extreme  care  in  revision.  "  The  truth  is,"  he  says, 
"that  an  author  cannot  work  upon  a  beautiful  poem  beyond 
a  certain  point  without  doing  it  real  and  irreparable  injury  in 
more  respects  than  one."1  He  felt  that  Campbell  had  worked, 
in  many  cases,  beyond  the  "  certain  point."  For  the  "  impet- 
uous lyric  sally,"  like  the  Mariners  of  England  and  the  Battle 
of  the  Baltic,  Scott  rightly  thought  that  Campbell  excelled  all 
his  contemporaries.  Moore  was  another  lyrist  whose  poetry 
Scott  greatly  admired.  In  Moore's  case,  as  in  Southey's,  the 
contemporary  estimate  was  higher  than  can  now  be  maintained, 
but  Moore  is  to-day  underrated.  From  what  Scott  says  about 
him  we  conclude  that  the  man's  personality  and  his  way  of 
singing  added  much  to  the  exquisiteness  of  his  songs.  "  He 
seems  almost  to  think  in  music,"  Scott  said,  "  the  notes  and 
words  are  so  happily  suited  to  each  other";2  and,  "it  would 
be  a  delightful  addition  to  life  if  T.  M.  had  a  cottage  within 
two  miles  of  one."3  Allan  Cunningham  was  a  young  protege 
of  Scott  whose  songs,  "  Its  hame  and  it's  hame,"  and  "  A  wet 
sheet  and  a  flowing  sea,"  seemed  to  him  "  among  the  best 
going."4  Another  poet  who  received  Scott's  good  offices  was 
Hogg,  whose  relations  with  the  greater  man  are  described  so 
vividly  and  at  some  points  so  amusingly  by  Lockhart.  Scott 
called  him  a  "  wonderful  creature  for  his  opportunities."5 

1  Quarterly  Review,  May,   1809.  3  Journal,  Vol.  I,  p.  9. 

^Familiar  Letters,  Vol.  I,  p.  341.  iLockhart,  Vol.  V,  p.  70. 

5 Ibid.,  Vol.  II,  p.  306. 


HIS    CRITICISM    OF    HIS    CONTEMPORARIES  97 

For  the  poet  Crabbe,  Scott,  like  Byron  and  Wordsworth,1 
had  a  steady  and  high  admiration.  In  the  Sunday  evening 
readings  that  Lockhart  describes  as  being  so  pleasant  a  feature 
of  the  life  of  the  family  in  Edinburgh,  Crabbe  was  perhaps 
the  chief  standing  resource  after  Shakspere.2  His  work  was 
particularly  recommended  to  the  young  people  of  the  family,3 
and  when  the  venerable  poet  visited  the  Scotts  in  1822,  he  was 
received  as  a  man  whom  they  always  looked  upon  as  nobly 
gifted.  Scott  once  wrote  of  him :  "  I  think  if  he  had  cultivated 
the  sublime  and  the  pathetic  instead  of  the  satirical  cast  of 
poetry,  he  must  have  stood  very  high  (as  indeed  he  does  at 
any  rate)  on  the  list  of  British  poets.  His  Sir  Eustace  Grey 
and  The  Hall  of  Justice  indicate  prodigious  talent."4  Scott  did 
not  like  Crabbe's  choice  of  subjects,5  but  he  appreciated  the 
"  force  and  vigour  "  of  a  poet  whom  students  of  our  own  day 
are  once  more  beginning  to  admire,  after  a  period  during  which 
he  was  practically  ignored. 

Scott's  very  high  estimation  of  Joanna  Baillie  has  already 
been  mentioned.6  In  this  case  as  in  many  others  he  was  proud 
and  happy  in  the  personal  friendship  of  the  writer  whose  works 
he  admired.  He  once  wrote  to  Miss  Edgeworth :  "  I  have 
always  felt  the  value  of  having  access  to  persons  of  talent  and 
genius  to  be  the  best  part  of  a  literary  man's  prerogative."7 
Almost  the  earliest  of  the  writers  for  whose  friendship  Scott 

1  Byron  said,  "  Crabbe's  the  man,  but  he  has  got  a  coarse  and  impracti- 
cable subject."  (Moore's  Life  and  Letters  of  Byron,  Vol.  IV,  pp.  63-4.) 
Leslie  Stephen  remarks  that  Crabbe  "  was  admired  by  Byron  in  his  rather 
wayward  mood  of  Pope-worship,  as  the  last  representative  of  the  legitimate 
school."      (English  Literature  and  Society  in   the   18th   Century,  p.  207.) 

^Lockhart,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  197. 

3  The  reader  will  at  once  recall  the  ingenuous  remark  of  Sophia  Scott 
when  she  was  asked,  shortly  after  its  appearance,  how  she  liked  The  Lady 
of  the  Lake.  She  said,  "  Oh,  I  have  not  read  it ;  Papa  says  there's  nothing 
so  bad  for  young  people  as  reading  bad  poetry."  (Lockhart ,  Vol.  II,  p. 
130.     See  also  the  Life  of  Irving,  Vol.  I,  p.  444.) 

^Familiar  Letters,  Vol.   II,  p.  94. 

5  Correspondence  of  C.  K.  Sharpe,  Vol.  I,  p.  353. 

6 See  Marmion,  introduction  to  Canto  III,  and  other  passages  noted  by 
Adolphus  in  the  Letters  to  Hcber,  p.  295.  See  also  Familiar  Letters,  Vol. 
I,  p.  198,  and  the  passage  in  Lockhart  (Vol.  II,  p.  132),  in  which  James 
Ballantyne  reports  Scott  as  saying  to  him,  "  If  you  wish  to  speak  of  a 
real  poet,  Joanna  Baillie  is  now  the  highest  genius  of  our  country." 

''Lockhart,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  306. 
7 


98  SCOTT   AS   A   CRITIC   OF   LITERATURE 

felt  grateful  was  Matthew  Lewis,  famed  as  the  author  of  The 
Monk.  Lewis  was  also  something  of  a  poet,  and  was  really 
helpful  to  Scott  in  giving  him  advice  on  literary  subjects. 
Though  Scott  perceived  that  Lewis's  talents  "  would  not  stand 
much  creaming  "l  he  continued  to  regard  him  as  one  who  had 
had  high  imagination  and  a  "  finer  ear  for  rhythm  than 
Byron's." 

Scott  felt  that  his  own  taste  in  respect  to  poetry  became  more 
rigorous  as  he  grew  older.  In  1823  in  a  letter  to  Miss  Baillie 
he  commented  on  Mrs.  Hemans  as  "  somewhat  too  poetical  for 
my  taste — too  many  flowers,  I  mean,  and  too  little  fruit — but 
that  may  be  the  cynical  criticism  of  an  elderly  gentleman;  for 
it  is  certain  that  when  I  was  young  I  read  verses  of  every  kind 
with  infinitely  more  indulgence,  because  with  more  pleasure 
than  I  can  now  do — the  more  shame  for  me  now  to  refuse  the 
complaisance  which  I  have  had  so  often  to  solicit."2  Similarly 
he  speaks  in  the  preface  to  Kenihvorth  of  having  once  been 
delighted  with  the  poems  of  Mickle  and  Langhorne :  "  There 
is  a  period  in  youth  when  the  mere  power  of  numbers  has  a 
more  strong  effect  on  ear  and  imagination  than  in  after-life." 
With  these  comments  we  may  put  Lockhart's  sagacious  re- 
mark :  "  His  propensity  to  think  too  well  of  other  men's  works 
sprung,  of  course,  mainly  from  his  modesty  and  good  nature; 
but  the  brilliancy  of  his  imagination  greatly  sustained  the  delu- 
sion. It  unconsciously  gave  precision  to  the  trembling  outline, 
and  life  and  warmth  to  the  vapid  colours  before  him."3  This 
and  his  kindness  would  account  for  the  latter  half  of  the  obser- 
vation made  by  his  publisher :  "  I  like  well  Scott's  ain  bairns — 
but  heaven  preserve  me  from  those  of  his  fathering."4 

I  have  found  no  reference  to  Landor,  a  poet  whom  Southey 
and  Wordsworth  read  with  eagerness,  but  Mr.  Forster  makes 
this  statement  in  his  Biography  of  Landor:  "  Among  Landor's 
papers  I  found  a  list,  prepared  by  himself,  of  resemblances  to 
passages  of  his  own  writing  to  be  found  in  Scott's  Tales  of 
the    Crusaders.     There    were    several    from    Gebir.  .  .  .  The 

1Lockhart,  Vol.  V,  p.  359  ;  also  Vol.  I,  p.  255  ;  and  Constable's  Corre- 
spondence, Vol.  Ill,  p.  300. 

2Lockhart,  Vol.  IV,  p.  117.  *Ibid.,  Vol.  V,  p.  448. 

4  Ibid.,  Vol.  II,  p.  14. 


HIS   CRITICISM    OF    HIS   CONTEMPORARIES  99 

poem  had  made  a  great  impression  on  Scott,  who  read  it  at 
Southey's  suggestion."1  Forster  also  notes  the  fact  that 
Souther,  in  a  letter  to  Scott  written  in  1812,  spoke  very  highly 
of  Landor's  Count  Julian.2  I  am  similarly  unable  to  cite  any 
comment  by  Scott  on  the  writings  of  Lamb.  Was  it  because 
Scott's  genius  clung  to  Scotland  and  Lamb's  to  London,  that 
the  two  seemed  so  little  to  notice  each  other?  It  does  seem 
odd  that  Scott  never  refers  to  the  delightful  Specimens  of  Eng- 
lish Dramatic  Poets.  At  one  time  Lamb  wrote  to  Sir  Walter 
asking  a  contribution  toward  a  fund  that  was  being  raised  to 
help  William  Godwin  out  of  pecuniary  troubles,  and  Scott 
replied,  through  the  artist  Haydon,  with  a  cheque  for  ten 
pounds  and  a  pleasant  message  to  Mr.  Lamb,  "  whom  I  should 
be  happy  to  see  in  Scotland,  though  I  have  not  forgotten  his 
metropolitan  preference  of  houses  to  rocks,  and  citizens  to  wild 
rustics  and  highland  men."3  Hazlitt  and  Hunt  were  two  other 
writers  whose  literary  work  Scott  ignored.4  This,  as  well  as 
his  neglect  of  Lamb's  and  DeQuincey's  essays,  may  be  due 
largely  to  the  fact  that  he  seldom  read  newspapers  and  maga- 
zines, and  these  writers  were  journalists  and  contributors  to 
periodicals.  Voracious  reader  as  Scott  was,  he  had  to  econo- 
mize time  somewhere,  and  the  hours  saved  from  papers  could 
be  given  to  books.  We  do  find  one  or  two  references  to  these 
men  as  political  writers.  Scott  hoped  Lockhart  would  learn, 
as  editor  of  the  Quarterly,  to  despise  petty  adversaries,  for  "  to 
take  notice  of  such  men  as  Hazlitt  and  Hunt  in  the  Quarterly 
would  be  to  introduce  them  into  a  world  which  is  scarce 
conscious  of  their  existence."5 

1Forster,  Vol.   I,  p.  84,  note.  ^Ibid.,  Vol.  I,  p.  95. 

zHaydon's  Correspondence,  Vol.  I,  p.  356. 

4  Hunt  says  Scott  was  interested  in  reading  The  Story  of  Rimini.  See 
Hunt's   Autobiography.   Vol.    I.   p.    260. 

^Journal,  Vol.  I,  p.  22.  Scott  wrote  as  follows  to  Lockhart  after  the 
appearance  of  Lord  Byron  and  Some  of  his  Contemporaries:  "Hunt  has 
behaved  like  a  hyena  to  Byron,  whom  he  has  dug  up  to  girn  and  howl 
over  him  in  the  same  breath."  Mr.  Lang  makes  this  comment :  "  Leigh 
Hunt  .  .  .  had  gone  out  of  his  way  to  insult  Sir  Walter  and  to  make  the 
most  baseless  insinuations  against  him.  Scott  probably  never  mentioned 
Leigh  Hunt's  name  publicly  in  his  life,  and  he  refers  to  the  insults  neither 
in  his  correspondence  nor  in  his  Journal."  (Lang's  Life  of  Lockhart,  Vol. 
II,  pp.  22  and  24.)     Hunt  evidently  thought  that  Scott  was  partly  respon- 


100  SCOTT  AS  A  CRITIC  OF  LITERATURE 

Among  novelists,  those  of  Scott's  contemporaries  to  whom 
he  gave  the  highest  praise  were  women.  This  is,  however,  to 
be  expected,  and  it  is -natural  to  find  Jane  Austen  receiving  the 
highest  praise  of  all ;  since  Scott  was  emphatically  not  of  the 
tribe  of  critics  who  are  able  to  appreciate  only  one  kind  of 
novel  or  poem.  Her  novels  seemed  to  grow  upon  him  and  he 
read  them  often.  It  was  in  connection  with  her  "  exquisite 
touch  "  that  he  was  moved  to  reflect,  in  the  words  so  often 
quoted  from  his  Journal,  "  The  Big  Bow-wow  strain  I  can  do 
myself  like  any  now  going."1  Among  the  expressions  of 
admiration  which  occur  in  his  review  of  Emma,2  Scott  records 
a  characteristic  bit  of  protest  in  regard  to  the  tendency  of  Miss 
Austen  and  other  novelists  to  make  prudence  the  guiding  mo- 
tive of  all  their  favorite  young  women  characters,  especially 
in  matters  of  the  heart.  He  did  not  like  this  pushing  out  of 
Cupid  to  make  way  for  so  moderate  a  virtue  as  prudence ;  he 
thought  that  it  is  often  good  for  young  people  to  fall  in  love 
without  regard  to  worldly  considerations.  Scott  rated  Miss 
Edgeworth  nearly  as  high  as  Miss  Austen,  and  hers  is  the 
added  honor  of  having  inspired  the  author  of  Waverley  with 
a  desire  to  emulate  her  power.3  With  these  two  novelists  he 
associated  Miss  Ferrier,  as  well  as  the  somewhat  earlier  writer, 
Fanny  Burney.4 

Aside  from  these  women  and  Henry  Mackenzie,  perhaps  the 
highest  praise  that  Scott  bestowed  on  any  contemporary  novel- 

sible  for  the  articles  in  Blackwood  on  the  Cockney  School.  He  says, 
"  Unfortunately  some  of  the  knaves  were  not  destitute  of  talent :  the 
younger  were  tools  of  older  ones  who  kept  out  of  sight."  (Hunt's  Lord 
Byron,  etc.,  Vol.  I,  p.  423.)  In  his  Autobiography,  Hunt  says,  "  Sir  Walter 
Scott  confessed  to  Mr.  Severn  at  Rome  that  the  truth  respecting  Keats  had 
prevailed."  (Vol.  II,  p.  44.)  Mr.  Lang  points  out  that  though  Colvin 
said  of  Scott  (in  his  Life  of  Keats)  "  that  he  was  in  some  measure  privy 
to  the  Cockney  School  outrages  seems  certain,"  he  afterwards  recanted  the 
statement.  (In  his  edition  of  Keats' s  Letters,  p.  60,  note.  See  Lang's 
Lockhart,  Vol.  I,  pp.  196-8.)  Scott  invited  Lamb  to  Abbotsford  when 
Lamb  was  looked  upon  as  a  leader  of  the  Cockney  School.     (Lang's  Scott, 

p-    52.) 

1  Journal,  Vol.  I,  p.  155  ;  Lockhart,  Vol.  IV,  p.  476,  and  Vol.  V,  p.  380. 

2  Quarterly,  October,   1815. 

3  Postscript  to   Waverley,  and   General  Introduction. 

4  For  references  to  the  group  of  women  novelists  who  were  so  success- 
ful in  depicting  manners,  see  the  Life  of  Charlotte  Smith;  the  Postscript 
to  Waverley;  the  Introduction  to  St.  Ronan's  Well;  Journal,  Vol.  I,  p.  164. 


HIS   CRITICISM    OF    BIS   CONTEMPORARIES  101 

ist  was  given  to  Cooper.  Here,  as  in  the  case  of  Byron,  Scott 
seemed  to  ignore  the  other  writer's  indebtedness  to  himself, 
lie  speaks,  in  the  general  preface  to  the  Waverley  Novels,  of 
"  that  striking  field  in  which  Mr.  Cooper  has  achieved  so  many 
triumphs  "  ;  and  at  another  time  calls  him  "  the  justly  celehrated 
American  novelist."  In  his  Journal  he  comments  on  The  Red 
Roverx  and  The  Prairie;2  The  I 'Hot  he  recommends  warmly  in 
a  letter  to  Miss  Edge  worth.3 

The  personal  relations  between  "  the  Scotch  and  American 
lions,"  as  Scott  called  himself  and  Cooper,  when  they  met  in 
Parisian  society  in  1826,''  had  some  interesting  consequences. 
Cooper  suggested  to  Scott  that  he  try  to  secure  for  himself 
part  of  the  profits  arising  from  the  publication  of  his  works  in 
America,  by  entering  them  as  the  property  of  some  citizen. 
They  finally  concluded  to  substitute  for  this  plan  one  suggested 
by  Scott,  which  involved  the  writing  by  the  Author  of  Waver- 
ley,  of  a  letter  addressed  to  Cooper,  to  be  transmitted  by  him 
to  some  American  publisher  who  would  undertake  the  publica- 
tion of  an  authorized  edition  of  which  half  the  profits  should 
go  to  the  author.  Future  works  were  to  be  sent  over  to  this 
publisher  in  advance  of  their  appearance  in  England.  The 
letter  was  really  an  appeal  to  the  justice  of  the  American  people, 
and  contained  an  allusion  to  the  publication  of  Irving's  works 
in  England  according  to  a  plan  very  similar  to  that  proposed 
by  Scott.  But  the  scheme  failed  here  in  America,  and  appa- 
rently the  letter  was  not  made  public  until  Cooper,  irritated 
by  the  appearance  in  Lockhart's  Life  of  Scott  of  Sir  Walter's 
comments  on  his  personal  manner,6  explained  the  affair  (except 
the  reason  for  dropping  the  plan),  and  published  the  corre- 

1  Journal,  Vol.  II,  p.   in.  2Ibid.,  Vol.  II,  p.   116. 

3  Lockhart,. Vol.  IV,  164. 

*  Journal,  Vol.  I,  p.  299  ;  Lockhart,  Vol.  V,  p.  65. 

5  Journal,  Vol.  I,  p.  295  ;  Lockhart,  Vol.  V,  p.  62. 

6The  reference  as  given  by  Lockhart  is  as  follows:  "This  man.  who 
has  shown  so  much  genius,  has  a  good  deal  of  the  manners,  or  want  of 
manners,  peculiar  to  his  countrymen."  (Lockhart,  Vol.  V,  p.  62.)  Cooper 
observes  in  regard  to  this  point :  "  The  manners  of  most  Europeans  strike 
us  as  exaggerated,  while  we  appear  cold  to  them.  Sir  Walter  Scott  was 
certainly  so  obliging  as  to  say  many  flattering  things  to  me.  which  I,  as 
certainly,  did  not  repay  in  kind.  As  Johnson  said  of  his  interview  with 
George  the  Third,  it  was  not  for  me  to  bandy  compliments  with  my  sover- 


102  SCOTT   AS   A   CRITIC   OF   LITERATURE 

spondence  in  the  Knickerbocker  Magazine  for  April,  1838.1 
Later  in  the  same  year  Cooper  wrote  a  severe  review  of  the 
biography  of  Scott,  attacking  his  character  in  a  way  that  seems 
absurdly  exaggerated.2  Yet  Charles  Sumner  seems  to  have 
thought  that  Cooper  made  his  points,  and  Mr.  Lounsbury  is 
inclined  to  agree  with  him.3 

eign.  At  that  time  the  diary  was  a  sealed  book  to  the  world,  and  I  did 
not  know  the  importance  he  attached  to  such  civilities."  It  is  a  pity  that 
the  transcriber  of  the  passage  in  the  Journal  changed  "  manner,"  which 
was  the  word  Scott  wrote,  to  the  more  objectionable  "  manners."  {Journal, 
Vol.   I,  p.  295.) 

1  Scott's  letter  was  substantially  as  follows :  "  I  have  considered  in  all 
its  bearings  the  matter  which  your  kindness  has  suggested.  Upon  many 
former  occasions  I  have  been  urged  by  my  friends  in  America  to  turn  to 
some  advantage  the  sale  of  my  writings  in  your  country,  and  render  that 
of  pecuniary  avail  as  an  individual  which  I  feel  as  the  highest  compliment 
as  an  author.  I  declined  all  these  proposals,  because  the  sale  of  this  coun- 
try produced  me  as  much  profit  as  I  desired,  and  more — far  more — than  I 
deserved.  But  my  late  heavy  losses  have  made  my  situation  somewhat 
different,  and  have  rendered  it  a  point  of  necessity  and  even  duty  to 
neglect  no  means  of  making  the  sale  of  my  works  effectual  to  the  extrica- 
tion of  my  affairs,  which  can  be  honorably  and  honestly  resorted  to.  If 
therefore  Mr.  Carey,  or  any  other  publishing  gentleman  of  credit  and 
character,  should  think  it  worth  while  to  accept  such  an  offer,  I  am  willing 
to  convey  to  him  the  exclusive  right  of  publishing  the  Life  of  Napoleon, 
and  my  future  works  in  America,  making  it  always  a  condition,  which 
indeed  will  be  dictated  by  the  publisher's  own  interest,  that  this  monopoly 
shall  not  be  used  for  the  purpose  of  raising  the  price  of  the  work  to  my 
American  readers,  but  only  for  that  of  supplying  the  public  at  the  usual 
terms.  .  .  . 

"  At  any  rate,  if  what  I  propose  should  not  be  found  of  force  to  prevent 
piracy,  I  cannot  but  think  from  the  generosity  and  justice  of  American 
feeling,  that  a  considerable  preference  would  be  given  in  the  market  to  the 
editions  emanating  directly  from  the  publisher  selected  by  the  author,  and 
in  the  sale  of  which  the  author  had  some  interest. 

"  If  the  scheme  shall  altogether  fail,  it  at  least  infers  no  loss,  and  there- 
fore is,  I  think,  worth  the  experiment.  It  is  a  fair  and  open  appeal  to  the 
liberality,  perhaps  in  some  sort  to  the  justice,  of  a  great  people;  and  I 
think  I  ought  not  in  the  circumstances  to  decline  venturing  upon  it.  I 
have  done  so  manfully  and  openly,  though  not  perhaps  without  some  pain- 
ful feelings,  which  however  are  more  than  compensated  by  the  interest 
you  have  taken  in  this  unimportant  matter,  of  which  I  will  not  soon  lose 
the  recollection."  {Knickerbocker  Magazine,  Vol.  XI,  p.  380  ff.,  April, 
1838.) 

2  Knickerbocker,  Vol.  XII,  p.  349  ff->  October,  1838. 

3  In  a  letter  written  in  January,  1839,  Sumner  said,  speaking  of  Cooper's 
article,  "  I  think  a  proper  castigation  is  applied  to  the  vulgar  minds  of 
Scott  and  Lockhart."  (See  Memoir  and  Letters  of  Charles  Sumner,  by 
Edward  L.  Pierce,  Vol.  II,  p.  38;  and  Lounsbury's  Cooper,  p.  160.) 


IMS    CRITICISM     OF    IMS    CONTHMPOKAUIKS  103 

One  of  the  milder  strictures  in  Cooper's  review  was  as  fol- 
lows: "  As  he  was  ambitious  of,  so  was  he  careful  to  preserve, 
his  personal  popularity,  of  which  wc  have  a  striking  proof  in 
the  studied  kindnesses  that  for  years  were  laid  before  this 
country  in  deeds  and  words,  as  compared  with  his  real  acts  and 
sentiments  toward  America  and  Americans  which  are  now 
revealed  in  his  letters."  A  passage  which  doubtless  roused 
Cooper's  ire  may  be  quoted.  Of  the  Americans  Scott  said,  in 
a  letter  to  Miss  Edgeworth,  "  They  are  a  people  possessed  of 
very  considerable  energy,  quickened  and  brought  into  eager 
action  by  an  honourable  love  of  their  country  and  pride  in  their 
institutions  ;  but  they  are  as  yet  rude  in  their  ideas  of  social  inter- 
course, and  totally  ignorant,  speaking  generally,  of  all  the  art  of 
good  breeding,  which  consists  chiefly  in  a  postponement  of  one's 
own  petty  wishes  or  comforts  to  those  of  others.  By  rude 
questions  and  observations,  an  absolute  disrespect  to  other 
people's  feelings,  and  a  ready  indulgence  of  their  own,  they 
make  one  feverish  in  their  company,  though  perhaps  you  may 
be  ashamed  to  confess  the  reason.  But  this  will  wear  off  and 
is  already  wearing  away.  Men,  when  they  have  once  got 
benches,  will  soon  fall  into  the  use  of  cushions.  They  are 
advancing  in  the  lists  of  our  literature,  and  they  will  not  be 
long  deficient  in  the  petite  morale,  especially  as  they  have,  like 
ourselves,  the  rage  for  travelling."1 

Scott  liked  George  Ticknor,2  and  he  called  Washington  Ir- 
ving "  one  of  the  best  and  pleasantest  acquaintances  I  have 
made  this  many  a  day."3     In  later  life  he  congratulated  him- 

1Lockhart,  Vol.   IV,  pp.    163-4.  iIbid.,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  262. 

3 Ibid.,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  131,  note;  Fain.  Let.,  Vol.  I,  p.  440.  "  Walter  Scott 
was  the  first  transatlantic  author  to  bear  witness  to  the  merit  of  Knicker- 
bocker," wrote  P.  M.  Irving  in  his  Life  of  Washington  Irving.  Henry 
Brevoort  presented  Scott  with  a  copy  of  the  second  edition  in  1813,  and 
received  this  reply  :  "  I  beg  you  to  accept  my  best  thanks  for  the  uncom- 
mon degree  of  entertainment  which  I  have  received  from  the  most  excel- 
lently jocose  history  of  New  York.  I  am  sensible  that  as  a  stranger  to 
American  parties  and  politics  I  must  lose  much  of  the  concealed  satire  of 
the  piece,  but  I  must  own  that  looking  at  the  simple  and  obvious  meaning 
only,  I  have  never  read  anything  so  closely  resembling  the  style  of  Dean 
Swift,  as  the  annals  of  Diedrich  Knickerbocker.  ...  I  think  too  there 
are  passages  which  indicate  that  the  author  possesses  powers  of  a  differ- 
ent kind,  and  has  some  touches  which  remind  me  much  of  Sterne."     (Life 


104  SCOTT   AS   A   CRITIC   OF   LITERATURE 

self  on  having  from  the  first  foreseen  Irving's  success.1  When 
we  remember  also  that  Scott  quotes  from  Poor  Richard,2  refers 
to  Cotton  Mather's  Magnolia,3  and  speaks  of  "  the  American 
Brown  "  as  one  whose  novels  might  be  reprinted  in  England,  * 
we  ought  probably  to  conclude  that  his  acquaintance  with  our 
literature  was  as  comprehensive  as  could  have  been  expected. 

Among  continental  writers  belonging  to  his  period,  Goethe 
was  very  properly  the  one  for  whom  Scott  had  the  strongest 
admiration.  But  we  find  comparatively  few  references  to  his 
reading  the  great  German  after  the  early  period  of  translation. 
Throughout  Lockhart's  Life  of  Scott  it  is  evident  that  the 
biographer  had  a  more  thorough  acquaintance  with  Goethe 
than  had  Scott,  and  it  seems  probable  that  the  younger  man 
influenced  the  elder  in  his  judgment  on  Faust  and  on  Goethe's 
character.  In  the  Introduction  to  Quentin  Durzvard  we  find 
an  interesting  comment  on  Goethe's  success  in  creating  a  really 
wicked  Mephistopheles,  who  escapes  the  noble  dignity  that 
Milton  and  Byron  gave  to  their  pictures  of  Satan.  Goethe  and 
Scott  exchanged  letters  once  in  1827,5  and  it  was  a  personal 
grief  to  Sir  Walter  that  the  German  poet's  death  prevented 
a  visit  Scott  proposed  to  make  him  in  1832.  In  Anne  of  Geier- 
stein  Goethe  is  called  "  an  author  born  to  arouse  the  slumber- 
ed Irving,  Vol.  I,  p.  240.)  When,  in  1819,  Irving  needed  money,  he  wrote 
to  Scott  for  advice  about  publishing  the  Sketch  Book  in  England.  "  Scott 
was  the  only  literary  man,"  he  says,  "  to  whom  I  felt  that  I  could  talk 
about  myself  and  my  petty  concerns  with  the  confidence  and  freedom  that 
I  would  to  an  old  friend — nor  was  I  deceived.  From  the  first  moment  that 
I  mentioned  my  work  to  him  in  a  letter,  he  took  a  decided  and  effective 
interest  in  it,  and  has  been  to  me  an  invaluable  friend."  (Vol.  I,  p.  456.) 
At  this  time  Scott  asked  Irving  to  accept  the  editorship  of  a  political  news- 
paper in  Edinburgh,  an  offer  which  Irving  of  course  refused.  (Fam.  Let., 
Vol.  II,  p.  60  ;  Life  of  Irving,  Vol.  I,  pp.  441-2,  and  Vol.  Ill,  pp.  272-3.) 
Scott  called  the  Sketch  Book  "  positively  beautiful."  He  was  by  some 
people  supposed  to  be  the  author.  In  this  connection  it  was  said  of  him 
that  his  "  very  numerous  disguises,"  and  his  "  well-known  fondness  for 
literary  masquerading,  seem  to  have  gained  him  the  advantage  of  being 
suspected  as  the  author  of  every  distinguished  work  that  is  published." 
(Letter  by  Lady  Lyttleton,  in  Life  of  Irving,  Vol.  II,  p.  '21. ) 

1Lockhart,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  131  ;  Life  of  Irving,  Vol.  I,  p.  240. 

2Lockhart,  Vol.   IV,  p.    161. 

^Letters  on  Demonology  and  Witchcraft,  Letter  II. 

*  Constable's  Correspondence,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  199. 

5Lockhart,  Vol.  V,  pp.   100-104. 


MIS   CRITICISM    OF    BIS   CONTEMPORARIES  105 

ing  fame  of  his  country  ";'  and  in  the  Journal  Scott  character- 
izes him  as  "  the  Ariosto  at  once  and  almost  the  Voltaire  of 
Germany."'-'  The  suggestion  for  the  character  of  Fenella  in 
Peveril  of  the  Peak  was  taken  from  Goethe,  as  we  learn  by 
Scott's  acknowledgment  in  the  Introduction.  Another  Ger- 
man from  whom  Scott  borrowed  a  suggestion — this  time 
for  the  unlucky  "  White  Lady  of  Avenel " — was  the 
Baron  de  la  Motte  Fouque.  Scott  was  evidently  interested  in 
his  work,  though  he  thought  Fouque  sometimes  used  such  a 
profusion  of  historical  and  antiquarian  lore  that  readers  would 
find  it  difficult  to  follow  the  narrative.3  Sir  Walter  asked  his 
son  to  tell  the  Baroness  de  la  Motte  Fouque  that  he  had  been 
much  interested  in  her  writings  and  those  of  the  Baron,  and 
added,  "  It  will  be  civil,  for  folks  like  to  know  that  they  are 
known  and  respected  beyond  the  limits  of  their  own  country."4 
In  the  literary  circles  of  Paris  Scott  more  than  once  experi- 
enced the  pleasure  of  finding  himself  "  known  and  respected  " 
by  foreigners,5  and  he  had  intimate  relations  with  men  of  letters 
in  London.  On  one  of  his  visits  there  he  saw  Byron  almost 
every  morning  for  some  time,  at  the  house  of  Murray  the  pub- 
lisher. In  Edinburgh  society  Scott  was  naturally  a  prominent 
figure,  being  noted  for  his  fund  of  anecdote  and  his  superior 
gifts  in  presiding  at  dinners.  But  however  much  his  kindly 
personal  feeling  is  reflected  in  his  comments  on  the  literary 
work  of  his  friends,  he  was  too  wrell-balanced  to  assume  any- 
thing of  the  patronizing  tone  that  such  success  as  his  might 
have  made  natural  to  another  sort  of  man.  His  fellow-poets 
thought  him  a  delightful  person  whom  they  liked  so  much  that 
they  could  almost  forgive  the  preposterous  success  of  his  facile 
and  unimportant  poetry. 

iVol.  I,  p.  371. 

2 Journal,  Vol.  I.  p.  359;  Lockhart,  Vol.  V,  p.  100.  See  also  Journal, 
Vol.   II,  pp.  483-4. 

3  Review  of  Hoffmann's  novels,  Foreign  Quarterly  R&view,  July,  1827. 

*Lockliart,  Vol.  IV,  p.  19. 

5  M.  Maigron  says,  speaking  of  the  vogue  of  Scott  in  France :  "  On  peut 
affirmer  mcrae  que,  de  1820  a  1830,  aucun  nom  francais  ne  fut  en  France 
aussi  connu  et  aussi  glorieux."  (Lc  Roman  Historique  a  l'£poqtte  Roman- 
tique,  p.  99.     See  also  pp.   100-133.) 


106  SCOTT   AS   A   CRITIC   OF   LITERATURE 

His  full-blooded  enjoyment  of  life  and  literature  tempered 
without  obscuring  his  critical  instinct,  and  though  he  was  "  will- 
ing to  be  pleased  by  those  who  were  desirous  to  give  pleasure,"1 
he  noted  the  weak  points  of  men  to  whose  power  he  gladly  paid 
tribute.  Wordsworth,  Coleridge,  Southey,  and  Byron,  whom 
he  classed  as  the  great  English  poets  of  his  time,  may,  with  the 
exception  of  Southey,  be  given  the  places  he  assigned  to  them. 
In  regard  to  Byron,  Scott  expressed  a  critical  estimate  that  the 
public  is  only  now  getting  ready  to  accept  after  a  long  period 
of  depreciating  Byron's  genius.  The  men  whose  work  Scott 
judged  fairly  and  sympathetically  represent  widely  different 
types.  With  some  of  them  he  was  connected  by  the  new  im- 
pulse that  they  were  imparting  to  English  poetry,  but  he  was 
so  close  to  the  transition  period  that  he  could  look  backward 
to  his  predecessors  with  no  sense  of  strangeness.  He  was 
never  inclined  to  quarrel  with  the  "  erroneous  system  "  of  a 
poem  which  he  really  liked.  His  comments  on  Byron's  Dark- 
ness suggest  that  if  he  had  read  more  than  he  did  of  Shelley 
and  others  among  his  younger  contemporaries  he  might  have 
found  much  to  reprehend,  but  he  held  that  "  we  must  not  limit 
poetical  merit  to  the  class  of  composition  which  exactly  suits 
one's  own  particular  taste."  2  Among  novelists  even  less  than 
among  poets  can  we  trace  a  "  school  "  to  which  he  paid  special 
allegiance.  He  read  and  enjoyed  all  sorts  of  good  stories, 
growing  in  this  respect  more  catholic  in  his  tastes,  though  per- 
haps more  severe  in  his  standards,  as  he  grew  older. 

In  speaking  of  Scott's  relations  with  his  contemporaries,  we 
must  especially  remember  his  ardent  interest  in  those  realities 
of  life  which  he  considered  greater  than  the  greatest  books.  In 
one  of  his  reviews  he  laid  stress  on  the  merit  of  writing  on  con- 
temporary events,3  and  he  seemed  to  think  there  was  too  little 

1The  phrase  is  quoted  from  Scott's  article  on  the  Life  and  Works  of 
John  Home,  in  which  it  is  applied  to  Home's  critical  work.  The  same 
idea  occurs  frequently  in  Scott's  books,  as  indicating  one  of  the  finest 
graces  of  life.  It  was  one  which  Sir  Walter  was  foremost  in  practicing 
in  all  his  social  relations. 

2  He  was  talking  about  Pope.  See  the  Recollections,  by  R.  P.  Gillies, 
Fraser's,  xii :  253    (Sept.,   1835). 

3  Review  of  The  Battles  of  Talavera,  Quarterly,  November,   1809. 


HIS   CRITICISM    OF    HIS   CONTEMPORARIES  107 

of  such  celebration.  There  are  many  evidences  of  his  great 
admiration  for  those  of  his  contemporaries  who  were  men  of 
action,  but  it  is  sufficient  to  remember  that  the  only  man  in 
whose  presence  Scott  felt  abashed  was  the  Duke  of  Wellington, 
for  he  counted  that  famous  commander  the  greatest  man  of 
his  time. 


CHAPTER   V 
Scott  as  a  Critic  of  His  Own  Work 

Lack  of  dogmatism  about  his  own  work— Harmony  between  his 
talents  and  his  tastes — His  conviction  of  the  value  of  spontaneity  and 
abundance  —  Merits  of  a  rapid  meter  —  Greater  care  necessary  in  verse 
writing  a  reason  why  he  turned  to  prose — His  attitude  in  regard  to 
revision — Modesty  about  his  own  work — His  opinion  of  the  popular 
judgment— Importance  of  novelty— Rivalry  with  Byron— Scott's  at- 
tempts to  keep  ahead  of  his  imitators— Devices  to  secure  novelty— His 
resolution  to  write  history— Historical  motives  of  his  novels — His  com- 
ments on  the  use  of  historical  material — His  verdict  in  regard  to  his 
descriptive  abilities  and  methods— Lack  of  emphasis  on  the  ethical 
aspect  of  his  work— His  judgment  on  the  position  of  the  novel  in 
literature. 

"  Scott  is  invariably  his  own  best  critic,"  says  Mr.  Andrew 
Lang.1  Of  this  Scott  was  not  himself  in  the  least  convinced, 
and  when  we  recall  how,  to  please  his  printer,  James  Ballantyne, 
he  tacked  on  a  last  scene  to  Rokeby,  resuscitated  the  dead 
Athelstane  in  Ivanhoe,  and  eliminated  the  main  motive  of  St. 
Ronans  Well,  we  wish  he  had  been  more  uniformly  inclined 
to  trust  his  own  critical  judgment. 

He  never  scheduled  the  qualities  of  his  own  genius.  A  man 
who  could  sincerely  say  what  he  did  about  literary  immortality 
would  not  be  apt  to  develop  any  dogma  in  regard  to  his 
.artistic  achievement.  "Let  me  please  my  own  generation,"  he 
said,  "and  let  those  that  come  after  us  judge  of  their  taste  and 
my  performances  as  they  please ;  the  anticipation  of  their 
neglect  or  censure  will  affect  me  very  little."2  His  opinions 
about  his  own  work  are  to  be  deduced  largely  from  casual 
remarks  scattered  through  his  letters  and  journals.  His  intro- 
ductions to  his  novels,  in  the  Opus  Magnum,  are  valuable 
sources,  however,  and  the  "  Epistle  "  preceding  The  Fortunes 
of  Nigel  is  a  mine  of  material,  though,  unlike  the  later  intro- 
ductions, it  was  written  "  according  to  the  trick,"  when  he  was 

1  Editor's  Introduction  to  Montrose,  Border  edition  of  the  Waverley 
Novels. 

2  Familiar  Letters,  Vol.  I,  p.  125. 

108 


BIS   CRITICISM    OF    HIS   OWN    WORK  L09 

still  preserving  his  anonymity.  We  have  an  article  which  he 
wrote  for  the  Quarterly  on  two  of  his  own  hooks,  the  review 
of  Talcs  of  My  Landlord.1  1  lis  criticism  of  the  work  of  other 
people  is  also  very  helpful  in  this  connection,  since  from  it  we 
may  learn  what  qualities  he  wished  to  find  in  poetry  and  in 
the  novel,  as  well  as  in  history,  biography,  and  criticism,  the 
fields  in  which  he  did  much,  though  less  famous  work. 

The  student  of  his  criticism  is  struck  at  once  by  the  fact 
that  the  qualities  which  Scott  particularly  admired  in  literature 
were  those  for  which  he  was  himself  preeminent.  Yet  he  can- 
not be  accused,  as  Poe  may  be,  of  constructing  a  theory  that 
those  types  of  art  were  greatest  which  he  found  himself  most 
skilful  in  exemplifying.  Scott's  nature  was  of  that  most  efficient 
kind  that  enables  a  man  to  do  such  things  as  he  likes  to  see 
done.  We  cannot  argue  that  he  was  incapable  of  attending  to/ 
minute  niceties  and  on  this  account  chose  to  emphasize  the 
large  qualities  of  literature.  For  notwithstanding  that  lack  of 
delicacy  which  characterized  his  physical  senses  and  which  we 
might  therefore  conclude  would  affect  his  literary  discernment, 
we  have  among  his  small  poems  some  that  show  his  power, 
occasionally  at  least,  to  satisfy  the  most  fastidious  critic  of 
detail.  Evidently  he  could  write  in  more  than  one  style,  and  i 
though  the  style  he  used  most  is  undoubtedly  that  which  was  \ 
most  natural  to  him,  it  was  also  that  which  he  thought,  on 
other  grounds  than  the  character  of  his  own  talents,  best  worth 
while.  Yet  he  had  so  little  vanity  in  regard  to  his  own  work  / 
that  he  could  hardly  understand  his  success,  though  it  depended 
on  those  very  qualities  which,  in  other  authors,  excited  his 
utmost  admiration. 

One  of  his  fundamental  opinions  about  literary  work  was  \ 
that  to  write  much  and  with  abundant  spontaneity  is  better  / 
than  to  polish  minutely.     Over  and  over  again  we  find  this 
idea  expressed,  most  noticeably  in  connection  with  the  poet 

1  Quarterly,  January,  1817.  Scott  evidently  wrote  this  article  chiefly  for 
the  purpose  of  defending  the  historical  accuracy  of  Old  Mortality.  He 
also  wished  to  show  that  The  Black  Dxvarf  was  founded  on  fact ;  and  he 
devoted  some  space,  as  will  appear  in  the  passage  quoted  below  (pp.  m  — 
112),  to  a  discussion  of  the  artistic  aspects  of  these  and  the  earlier 
Waverley    novels. 


110  SCOTT   AS   A   CRITIC    OF   LITERATURE 

Campbell,  whom  Scott  could  scarcely  forgive  for  making  so 
little  use  of  his  poetical  gifts.  He  applauded  the  much-criti- 
cised fertility  of  Byron,  whose  genius  was  in  that  respect  akin 
to  his  own.  "  I  never  knew  name  or  fame  burn  brighter  by 
over-chary  keeping  of  it,"1  Scott  said.  The  greatest  writers, 
he  observed,  have  been  the  most  voluminous.  His  position 
was  one  that  could  be  fortified  by  inductive  reasoning,  con- 
trasting in  this  respect  with  theories  which  seem  plausible  only 
until  they  are  tested  by  actual  facts,  as,  for  example,  Poe's 
idea  that  long  poems  lose  effectiveness  by  their  length.  But 
perhaps  Scott  did  not  sufficiently  take  into  account  the  circular 
nature  of  his  argument;  for  since  the  world  has  refused  to 
consider  the  men  very  great  who  "  never  spoke  out,"  the  truth 
is  not  so  much  that  a  great  man  ought  to  write  copiously  as 
that  if  a  man  does  not  write  copiously  he  will  not  be  counted 
great.  Scott  seemed  to  think  it  was  mere  wilfulness  that  pre- 
vented a  man  of  such  gifts  as  Campbell's  from  writing 
abundantly. 

The  corresponding  disadvantages  of  rapid  composition  were 
of  course  evident  to  him.  From  the  first  appearance  of  the 
Lay  to  the  end  of  his  career  he  lamented  his  inability  to  plan 
a  story  in  an  orderly  manner  and  follow  out  the  scheme ;  he 
admitted  also  that  "  the  misfortune  of  writing  fast  is  that  one 
cannot  at  the  same  time  write  concisely."2  Of  Marmion  he 
told  Southey,  "  I  had  not  time  to  write  the  poem  shorter."3 

His  grief  on  these  points  seems  qualified,  however,  by  a  con- 
Iviction  that  he  could  not  write  with  deliberation  and  method 
and  still  produce  the  effect  of  vivacious  spontaneity.  He 
thought  Fielding  was  almost  the  only  novelist  who  had  thor- 
oughly succeeded  in  combining  these  various  admirable  quali- 
ties,'4 and  he  said  in  this  connection,  "  To  demand  equal  cor- 
rectness and  felicity  in  those  who  may  follow  in  the  track  of 
that  illustrious  novelist,  would  be  to  fetter  too  much  the  power 
of  giving  pleasure,  by  surrounding  it  with  penal  rules ;  since 
of  this  sort  of  light  literature  it  may  be  especially  said — tout 

1  Journal,  Vol.  II,  p.  269.  2  Ibid.,   Vol.   II,   p.   276. 

3 Familiar  Letters,  Vol.  I,  p.  96. 

4 Introductory  epistle  to  Nigel;  Fam.  Let.,  Vol.  I,  p.  28. 


SIS   CRITICISM    OF    HIS   OWN    WORK  111 

genre  est  permis,  hors  le  genre  ennuyeux."1  "To  confess  to 
you  the  truth,"  says  the  "  Author"  in  the  Introductory  Epistle 
to  Nigel,  "the  works  and  passages  in  which  i  have  succeeded, 
have  uniformly  been  written  with  the  greatest  rapidity;  and 
when  I  have  seen  some  of  these  placed  in  opposition  with 
others,  and  commended  as  more  highly  finished,  I  could  appeal 
to  pen  and  standish,  that  the  parts  in  which  I  have  come  feebly 
off  were  by  much  the  more  laboured."  He  attempted  to  write  ^ 
Rokeby  with  great  care,  but  threw  the  first  version  into  the 
fire  because  he  concluded  that  he  had  "  corrected  the  spirit  out) 
of  it,  as  a  lively  pupil  is  sometimes  flogged  into  a  dunce  by  a 
severe  schoolmaster."-  He  was  better  satisfied  with  the  result 
when  he  resumed  his  pen  in  his  "old  Cossack  manner."3 
Similarly  he  writes  of  John  Home's  tragedy,  Douglas,  that  the 
finest  scene  was,  "  we  learn  with  pleasure  but  without  sur- 
prise," unchanged  from  the  first  draft;1  and  elsewhere  he 
speaks  of  the  greater  chance  for  popularity  of  the  "  bold,  de- 
cisive, but  light-touched  strain  of  poetry  or  narrative  in  literary 
composition,"  over  the  "more  highly-wrought  performance."5 
A  good  exposition  of  Scott's  real  opinion  in  regard  to  his 
own  style  is  to  be  found  in  his  review  of  Tales  of  My  Landlord. 
Some  parts  of  the  article  were  probably  inserted  by  his  friend 
William  Erskine,  but  the  section  I  quote  bears  unmistakable 
evidence  that  it  was  written  by  the  author  himself,  for  it  ex- 
presses that  combined  reprobation  and  approval  of  his  style 
which  is  amusingly  characteristic  of  him.  He  says :  Our 
author  has  told  us  that  it  was  his  object  to  present  a  series  of 
scenes  and  characters  connected  with  Scotland  in  its  past  and 
present  state,  and  we  must  own  that  his  stories  are  so  slightly 
constructed  as  to  remind  us  of  the  showman's  thread  with 
which  he  draws  up  his  pictures  and  presents  them  successively 
to  the  eye  of  the  spectator.  .  .  .  Against  this  slovenly  indiffer- 
ence we  have  already  remonstrated,  and  we  again  enter  our 

1  Introduction  to  the  Monastery. 
^Familiar  Letters,  Vol.   I,  p.   258. 

3Rokeby,  Canto  VI,  stanza  26;  Waverley,  Vol.  II,  pp.  399-400;  Journal, 
Vol.  I,  p.   117;  Lockhart,  Vol.  IV,  pp.  447-8. 

4 Review  of  the  Life  and  Works  of  John  Home,  Quarterly,  June,  1827. 
8  Review   of   Southery's   Life  of  Banyan,    Quarterly,   October,    1830. 


r 


112  SCOTT   AS   A   CRITIC    OF   LITERATURE 

protest.  .  .  .  We  are  the  more  earnest  in  this  matter,  because 
it  seems  that  the  author  errs  chiefly  from  carelessness.  There 
may  be  something  of  system  in  it,  however,  for  we  have  re- 
marked, that  with  an  attention  which  amounts  even  to  affecta- 
tion, he  has  avoided  the  common  language  of  narrative,  and 
thrown  his  story,  as  much  as  possible,  into  a  dramatic  shape." 
In  many  cases  this  has  added  greatly  to  the  effect,  by  keeping 
both  the  actors  and  action  continually  before  the  reader,  and 
placing  him,  in  some  measure,  in  the  situation  of  an  audience 
at  a  theategv,  who  are  compelled  to  gather  the  meaning  of  the 
scene  from  what  the  dramatis  personae  say  to  each  other,  and 
not  from  any  explanation  addressed  immediately  to  themselves. 
But  though  the  author  gain  this  advantage,  and  thereby  compel 
the  reader  to  think  of  the  personages  of  the  novel  and  not  of 
the  writer,  yet  the  practice,  especially  pushed  to  the  extent  we 
have  noticed,  is  a  principal  cause  of  the  flimsiness  and  inco- 
herent texture  of  which  his  greatest  admirers  are  compelled 
to  complain."1 

Lockhart  points  out  that  the  fruit  of  Scott's  study  of  Dryden 
may  have  been  to  fortify  his  opinion  as  to  what  the  greatness 
of  literature  really  consists  in,  and  applies  to  Scott  himself 
some  of  the  phrases  used  in  the  characterization  of  the  earlier 
poet.  " '  Rapidity  of  conception,  a  readiness  of  expressing 
every  idea,  without  losing  anything  by  the  way ' ;  '  perpetual 
animation  and  elasticity  of  thought ' ;  and  language  '  never 
laboured,  never  loitering,  never  (in  Dryden's  own  phrase) 
cursedly  confined,'  "  are  set  over  against  "  pointed  and  nicely 
turned  lines,  sedulous  study,  and  long  and  repeated  correction 
and  revision,"  and  are  pronounced  the  superior  virtues.2  The 
concluding  paragraph  of  Scott's  review  of  a  poem  on  the 
Battle  of  Talavera  exemplifies  his  use  of  this  doctrine.  "  We 
have  shunned,  in  the  present  instance,"  he  says,  "  the  unpleas- 
ant task  of  pointing  out  and  dwelling  upon  individual  inaccu- 
racies. There  are  several  hasty  expressions,  flat  lines,  and 
deficient  rhymes,  which  prove  to  us  little  more  than  that  the 
composition  was  a  hurried  one.  These,  in  a  poem  of  a  differ- 
ent description,  we  should  have  thought  it  our  duty  to  point 

1  Quarterly,  January,  1817.  ^Lockhart,  Vol.  II,  pp.  7-8. 


HIS    CRITICISM    OF    HIS   OWN    WORK  113 

out  to  the  notice  of  the  author.  But  after  all  it  is  the  spirit 
of  a  poet  that  we  consider  as  demanding'  our  chief  attention; 
and  upon  its  ardour  or  rapidity  must  finally  hinge  our  applause 
or  condemnation."1 

Scott's  opinions  about  meters  reflect  the  same  taste.  He 
persuaded  himself,  when  he  was  writing  The  Lady  of  the  Lake, 
that  the  eight-syllable  line  is  "  more  congenial  to  the  English 
language — more  favourable  to  narrative  poetry  at  least — than 
that  which  has  been  commonly  termed  heroic  verse,"  2  and  he 
proceeded  to  show  that  the  first  half-dozen  lines  of  Pope's  Iliad 
were  each  "  bolstered  out  "with  a  superfluous  adjective.  "  The 
case  is  different  in  descriptive  poetry,"  he  added,  "  because  there 
epithets,  if  they  are  happily  selected,  are  rather  to  be  sought  after 
than  avoided.  .  .  .  But  if  in  narrative  you  are  frequently  com- 
pelled to  tag  your  substantives  with  adjectives,  it  must  fre- 
quently happen  that  you  are  forced  upon  those  that  are  merely 
commonplaces."  He  mentions  other  beauties  of  his  favorite 
verse, — the  opportunities  for  variation  by  double  rhyme  and  by 
occasionally  dropping  a  syllable,  and  the  correspondence  be- 
tween the  length  of  line  and  our  natural  intervals  between 
punctuation, — but  gives  as  his  final  excuse  for  using  it  his 
"  better  knack  at  this  '  false  gallop  '  of  verse."  The  argument 
is  ingenious  enough,  but  his  analysis  of  heroic  verse  has  only 
a  limited  application,  and  his  last  reason  probably  was,  as  he 
was  candid  enough  to  admit,  the  most  weighty.  George  Ellis 
replied  to  his  defence  thus :  "  I  don't  think,  after  all  the  elo- 
quence with  which  you  plead  for  your  favourite  metre,  that 
you  really  like  it  from  any  other  motive  than  that  saint e 
paresse — that  delightful  indolence — which  induces  one  to  de- 
light in  those  things  which  we  can  do  with  the  least  fatigue." 3 
This  seems  hardly  a  fair  return  for  the  poet's  appeal  to  Ellis 
in  one  of  the  epistles  of  Marmion:4 

"  Come  listen  !  bold  in  thy  applause, 
The  bard  shall  scorn  pedantic  laws." 

Another  introduction  in  the  same  poem  is  given  up  to  a  justi- 

1  Quarterly,  November,  1809.  'Ibid..    Vol.    II,   p.    129. 

2Lockhart,  Vol.  II,  p.  128.  *  Epistle  prefixed  to  Canto  V. 

8 


114  SCOTT   AS   A   CRITIC    OF   LITERATURE 

fication  of  the  author's  "  unconfined  "  style,  on  the  score  of  his 
love  for  the  wild  songs  of  his  own  country  and  the  freedom  of 
his  early  training.1 

Scott  practically  never  rewrote  his  prose,  and  the  result  gave 
Hazlitt  opportunity  to  say  :2  "  We  should  think  the  writer  could 
not  possibly  read  the  manuscript  after  he  has  once  written  it, 
or  overlook  the  press."3  His  habit  of  carrying  two  trains  of 
thought  on  together  was  also  responsible  for  slips  in  diction 

I  and  syntax.  An  amanuensis  working  for  him  noticed  this  pecu- 
liarity, and  Scott  said  in  his  Journal:  "  There  must  be  two  cur- 
rents of  ideas  going  on  in  my  mind  at  the  same  time.  .  .  . 
I  always  laugh  when  I  hear  people  say,  Do  one  thing  at  once. 

|  I  have  done  a  dozen  things  at  once  all  my  life."4 

But  the  making  of  poetry  required  more  attention.  "  Verse 
I  write  twice,  and  sometimes  three  times  over,"5  he  said,  and 
one  is  moved  to  wonder  whether  the  distaste  for  writing  poetry, 

1  Epistle  prefixed  to  Canto  III. 

2Hazlitt's  Spirit  of  the  Age,  art.  Sir  Walter  Scott;  see  Letters  to  Hcber, 

P-   75   ff- 

3 It  is  hard  to  say  just  how  much  he  accomplished  by  the  proof-reading, 
which,  to  judge  by  his  Journal,  he  habitually  performed.  He  wrote  to 
Kirkpatrick  Sharpe  in  1809,  after  seeing  a  new  number  of  the  Quarterly  : 
"  I  am  a  little  disconcerted  with  the  appearance  of  one  or  two  of  my  own 
articles,  which  I  have  had  no  opportunity  to  revise  in  proof."  (Sharpe's 
Correspondence,  Vol.  I, .  p.  370.)  Lockhart  gives  an  interesting  sample 
of  a  sheet  of  Scott's  poetry  tentatively  revised  by  Ballantyne  and  reworked 
by  the  author.  (Lockhart,  Vol.  Ill,  pp.  32-5.)  It  is  certain  that  Ballan- 
tyne made  many  suggestions,  some  of  which  Scott  accepted  and  some  of 
which  he  summarily  rejected.  In  Hogg's  Domestic  Manners  of  Scott  we 
find  the  following  account  of  what  the  printer  said  when  Hogg  reported 
that  Sir  Walter  was  to  correct  some  proofs  for  him :  "  He  correct  them 
for  you !  Lord  help  you  and  him  both !  I  assure  you  if  he  had  nobody 
to  correct  after  him,  there  would  be  a  bonny  song  through  the  country. 
He  is  the  most  careless  and  incorrect  writer  that  ever  was  born,  for  a 
voluminous  and  popular  writer,  and  as  for  sending  a  proof  sheet  to  him, 
we  may  as  well  keep  it  in  the  office.  He  never  heeds  it.  .  .  .  He  will 
never  look  at  either  your  proofs  or  his  own,  unless  it  be  for  a  few  minutes 
amusement"  (pp.  242-3).  When  he  wrote  to  Miss  Baillie  that  he  had  read 
the  proofs  of  a  play  of  hers  which  was  being  published  in  Edinburgh,  he 
added,  "  but  this  will  not  ensure  their  being  altogether  correct,  for  in 
despite  of  great  practice,  Ballantyne  insists  I  have  a  bad  eye."  (Familiar 
\^_  Letters,  Vol.  I,  p.  173.) 

4 Journal,  Vol.  II,  p.  79;  also  234  and  239;  Lockhart,  Vol.  V,  pp.  116 
and  240. 

5 Journal,  Vol.  I,  p.  117;  Lockhart,  Vol.  IV,  p.  448. 


BIS   i  Klin  ism    OF    Mis   OWN    WORE  115 

that  lie  professed  about  1822,  arose  largely  from  a  growing 
aversion  to  what  he  probably  considered  extreme  care  in  com- 
position.1 A  series  of  three  comments  on  his  own  poetry  may 
be  given  to  illustrate  his  widely  varying  moods  in  regard  to 
it.  They  are  all  taken  from  letters  written  not  far  from  the 
time  when  Marmion  was  published.  "  As  for  poetry,  it  is  very 
little  labour  to  me ;  indeed  'twere  pity  of  my  life  should  I  spend 
much  time  on  the  light  and  loose  sort  of  poetry  which  alone  I 
can  pretend  to  write."2  "I  believe  no  man  now  alive  writes 
more  rapidly  than  I  do  (no  great  recommendation),  but  I  never 
think  of  making  verses  till  I  have  a  sufficient  stock  of  poetical 
ideas  to  supply  them."3  "  If  I  ever  .write  another  poem,  I  am 
determined  to  make  every  single  couplet  of  it  as  perfect  as 
my  uttermost  care  and  attention  can  possibly  effect."'  In  spite 
of  this  -momentary  resolution  to  take  more  pains  with  his  next 
poem,  he  was  unable  to  do  so  when  the  time  came ;  or  if,  as 
in  the  case  of  Rokcby  he  did  make  the  attempt,  the  results 
seemed  to  him  unsatisfactory.  Yet  verse  required  much  more 
careful  finishing  than  prose,  even  when  it  was  written  by 
Scott,  and  this  fact  has  been  too  little  emphasized  in  discus- 
sions of  his  transition  from  verse  to  prose  romances. 

Scott's  temperamental  aversion  to  revising  what  he  had  once 
written  was  evidently  sanctioned  by  his  literary  creed.  Near 
the  end  of  his  life  he  recalled  how  he  had  submitted  one  of  his 
earliest  poems  to  the  criticism  of  several  acquaintances,  with 
the  consequence  that  after  he  had  adopted  their  suggestions, 
hardly  a  line  remained  unaltered,  and  yet  the  changes  failed 
to  satisfy  the  critics.5  He  said :  "  This  unexpected  result,  after 
about  a  fortnight's  anxiety,  led  me  to  adopt  a  rule  from  which 
I  have  seldom  departed  during  more  than  thirty  years  of  lit- 
erary life.  When  a  friend  whose  judgment  I  respect  has  decided 
and  upon  good  advisement  told  me  that  a  manuscript  was  worth 
nothing,  or  at  least  possessed  no  redeeming  qualities  sufficient 
to  atone  for  its  defects,  I  have  generally  cast  it  aside ;  but  I 
am  little  in  the  custom  of  paying  attention  to  minute  criticisms 

1  Lockhart,  Vol.  IV,  pp.  2  and  391.       3  Ibid.,  Vol.  I,  p.  101. 

2  Familiar  Letters,  Vol.  I,  p.  72.  *Ibid.,  Vol.  I,  p.   113. 
5  Essay  on  Imitations  of  the  Ancient  Ballad. 


116  SCOTT   AS   A   CRITIC    OF   LITERATURE 

or  of  offering  such  to  any  friend  who  may  do  me  the  honour  to 
consult  me.  I  am  convinced  that,  in  general,  in  removing  even 
errors  of  a  trivial  or  venial  kind,  the  character  of  originality 
is  lost,  which,  upon  the  whole,  may  be  that  which  is  most  val- 
uable in  the  production."  This  position  appears  doubly  sig- 
nificant when  we  remember  that  it  was  assumed  by  a  man  who 
had  only  the  slightest  possible  amount  of  paternal  jealousy  in 
regard  to  his  writings.1 

Scott  did  not  always  adhere  to  this  resolution,  for  he  did 
accept  criticism  and  make  alterations,  more  in  compliance  with 
the  wishes  of  James  Ballantyne,  his  friend  and  printer,  than  to 
meet  the  desires  of  anyone  else.  He  considered  that  Ballantyne 
represented  the  ordinary  popular  taste,  and  he  was  ready  to 
make  some  sacrifice  of  his  own  judgment  in  order  to  satisfy 
his  public.  He  sent  the  conclusion  of  Rokeby  to  Ballantyne 
with  this  note :  "  Dear  James, — I  send  you  this  out  of  deference 
to  opinions  so  strongly  expressed,  but  still  retaining  my  own, 
that  it  spoils  one  effect  without  producing  another." 

When  one  of  his  books  was  adversely  criticised  by  the  public 
he  received  the  judgment  with  open  mind,  and  often  analyzed 
it  with  much  acuteness.  The  introduction  to  The  Monastery 
is  a  good  example  of  frank,  though  not  servile,  submission  to 
the  decree  of  public  opinion.  That  he  was  deeply  impressed 
with  his  blunder  in  managing  the  White  Lady  of  Avenel  may 
be  surmised  from  the  fact  that  in  several  later  discussions  of 
the  effect  of  supernatural  apparitions  in  novels,  he  emphasized 
the  necessity  of  keeping  them  sufficiently  infrequent  to  pre- 
serve an  atmosphere  of  mystery.  Of  The  Monastery  he  said: 
"  I  agree  with  the  public  in  thinking  the  work  not  very  inter- 
esting; but  it  was  written  with  as  much  care  as  the  others — 

1 A  friend  of  Scott's  once  wrote  to  him,  "  You  are  the  only  author  I 
ever  yet  knew  to  whom  one  might  speak  plain  about  the  faults  found  with 
'  his  works."  (Familiar  Letters,  Vol.  I,  p.  282.)  He  took  great  pains,  con- 
trary to  his  usual  custom,  in  revising  and  correcting  the  Malachi  Mala- 
growther  papers,  but  these  were  argumentative  and  in  an  altogether  dif- 
ferent class  from  his  poems  and  novels ;  and  besides  he  felt  a  special 
responsibility  in  writing  upon  a  public  matter  "  far  more  important  than 
anything  referring  to  [his]  fame  or  fortune  alone."  (Lockhart,  Vol.  IV, 
p.  460.) 


HIS   CRITICISM    OF    HIS   OWN    WORK  117 

that  is,  with  no  care  at  all."1  But  sometimes  lie  felt  inclined 
to  rebel  against  a  popular  verdict,  as  when  Noma,  in  The 
Pirate,  was  said  to  be  a  mere  copy  of  Meg  Merrilies.2 

In  his  later  days  he  grew  more  and  more  unsure  of  himsi  If, 
as  he  felt  compelled  to  work  at  his  topmost  speed.  His  Jour- 
nal for  1829  has  the  following  record  in  regard  to  a  review 
he  was  writing :  "  I  began  to  warm  in  my  gear,  and  am 
about  to  awake  the  whole  controversy  of  Goth  and  Celt.  I 
wish  I  may  not  make  some  careless  blunders."3  The  criticisms 
of  "  J.  B."  became  more  frequent  and  more  irritating  to  him 
as  he  felt  a  growing  inability  to  achieve  precision  in  details.4 
Wlien  Lockhart  pointed  out  some  lapses  in  his  style,  he  wrote  j 
in  his  Journal,  "  Well !  I  v\dll  try  to  remember  all  this,  but  after! 
all  I  write  grammar  as  I  speak,  to  make  my  meaning  known, 
and  a  solecism  in  point  of  composition,  like  a  Scotch  word  in 
speaking,  is  indifferent  to  me."5  Until  he  felt  his  powers  fail- 
ing, he  was  for  the  most  part  at  once  good-natured  and  inde- 
pendent in  his  manner  of  receiving  criticism.  Whether  or  nc/t 
he  agreed  with  the  opinion  expressed,  he  usually  thought  that 
what  he  had  once  written  might  best  stand,  though  he  might 
be  influenced  in  later  work  by  the  advice  that  had  been  given.6 

"  I  am  sensible  that  if  there  be  anything  good  about  my1 
poetry  or  prose  either,"  Scott  wrote,  in  a  passage  that  has  often 
been  quoted,  "  it  is  a  hurried  frankness  of  composition  which 
pleases  soldiers,  sailors  and  young  people  of  bold  and  active 
disposition."7  I  have  tried  to  show  that  this  quality  was  one 
which  he  not  only  enjoyed,  in  his  own  work  and  in  that  of  other 
writers,  but  that  as  a  critic  he  very  seriously  approved  of  it. 

Yet  in  spite  of  his  belief  that  the  greatest  literature  is  not 
the  result  of  slow  and  painful  labor,  it  was  probably  the  ease 
with  which  he  wrote  which  led  him  to  undervalue  his  own 
work.     However  we  may  account  for  it,  he  found  difficulty  in 

1  Lockhart,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  379.  :  Introduction  to  the  Pirate. 

3  Journal,  Vol.   II,  p.   250. 

4  This  was,  of  course,  an  effect  of  overwork  and  disease.  Irving  quotes 
Scott  as  saying:  "It  is  all  nonsense  to  tell  a  man  that  his  mind  is  not 
affected,  when  his  body  is  in  this  state."     (fr-iug's  Life,  Vol.  II,  p.  4S9-) 

5  Journal,  Vol.  I,  p.  181.  6  See  Lockhart,  Vol.  II,  pp.  265-6. 
"Journal,  Vol.  I,  pp.  212-13;  Lockhart,  Vol.  V,  p.   13. 


118  SCOTT    AS    A   CRITIC    OF   LITERATURE 

regarding  himself  as  a  great  author.1  When  this  modesty  of 
his  came  into  conflict  with  the  other  opinion  that  he  had  always 
been  inclined  to  hold — that  the  popularity  of  books  is  a  test 
*  of  their  merit — the  result  is  amusing.  He  was  impelled  at 
times  to  utter  contemptuous  words  about  the  foolishness  of  the 
public,  and  of  course  he  could  not  help  being  moved  also  in 
the  other  direction — to  believe  there  was  more  in  his  writings 
/han  he  had  realized.  In  one  mood  he  said,  "  I  thank  God  I 
Van  write  ill  enough  for  the  present  taste  ";2  and  "  I  have  very 
little  respect  for  that  dear  publicum  whom  I  am  doomed  to 
amuse,  like  Goody  Trash  in  Bartholomew  Fair,  with  rattles 
and  gingerbread ;  and  I  should  deal  very  uncandidly  with  those 
who  may  read  my  confessions  were  I  to  say  I  knew  a  public 
worth  caring  for,  or  capable  of  distinguishing  the  nicer  beauties 
of  composition.  They  weigh  good  and  evil  qualities  by  the 
sound.  Get  a  good  name  and  you  may  write  trash.  Get  a 
[bad  one  and  you  may  write  like  Homer,  without  pleasing  a 
^single  reader."3  Looking  back  from  the  end  of  his  career  to 
the  time  when  The  Lady  of  the  Lake  was  in  the  height  of  its 
success,  he  wrote :  "  It  must  not  be  supposed  that  I  was  either 
so  ungrateful  or  so  superabundantly  candid  as  to  despise  or 
scorn  the  value  of  those  whose  voice  had  elevated  me  so  much 

1  See  Familiar  Letters,  Vol.  II,  p.  309  ;  Lockhart,  Vol.  I,  p.  216  ;  Vol. 
IV,  pp.  128  and  498;  Vol.  V,  pp.   128,  412,  448. 

2  Correspondence  of  C.  K.  Sharpe,  Vol.  I,  p.  352. 

3  Journal,  Vol.  II,  p.  276.  In  the  Edinburgh  Annual  Register  for  1808 
(published  1810)  is  an  article  on  the  Living  Poets  of  Great  Britain,  which 
if  not  written  by  Scott  was  evidently  influenced  by  him.  Speaking  of 
Southey,  Campbell  and  Scott,  the  writer  says :  "  Were  we  set  to  classify 
their  respective  admirers  we  should  be  apt  to  say  that  those  who  feel 
poetry  most  enthusiastically  prefer  Southey  ;  those  who  try  it  by  the  most 
severe  rules  admire  Campbell ;  while  the  general  mass  of  readers  prefer 
to  either  the  Border  Poet.  In  this  arrangement  we  should  do  Mr.  Scott 
no  injustice,  because  we  assign  to  him  in  the  number  of  suffrages  what  we 
deny  him  in  their  value."  He  once  wrote  to  Miss  Baillie,  "  No  one  can 
both  eat  his  cake  and  have  his  cake,  and  I  have  enjoyed  too  extensive 
popularity  in  this  generation  to  be  entitled  to  draw  long-dated  bills  upon 
the  applause  of  the  next."  {Familiar  Letters,  Vol.  I,  p.  173.)  But  in  the 
Introductory  Epistle  to  Nigel  he  said,  "  It  has  often  happened  that  those 
who  have  been  best  received  in  their  own  time  have  also  continued  to  be 
acceptable  to  posterity.  I  do  not  think  so  ill  of  the  present  generation 
as  to  suppose  that  its  present  favour  necessarily  infers  future  condem- 
nation." 


BIS    CRITICISM    OF    HIS   OWN    WORK  119 

higher  than  my  own  opinion  told  mc  I  deserved.  T  felt,  on 
the  contrary,  the  more  grateful  to  the  public  as  receiving  that 
from  partiality  which  1  could  not  have  claimed  from  merit; 
and  I  endeavoured  to  deserve  the  partiality  by  continuing  such 
exertions  as  I  was  capable  of  for  their  amusement."1  The 
perfect  respectability  of  these  remarks  tempts  the  reader  to  set 
over  against  them  this  earlier  observation  by  the  same  writer 
in  the  guise  of  Chrystal  Croftangry,  "  One  thing  I  have  learned 
in  life — never  to  speak  sense  when  nonsense  will  answer  the 
purpose  as  well."8 

CWhatever  Scott  might  think  of  the  worth  of  public  admira- 
tion, he  frankly  attempted  to  write  what  wrould  be  popular. 
He  had  none  of  the  feeling  which  has  characterized  many  very 
interesting  men  of  letters,  that  the  desire  for  self-expression 
is  the  one  motive  of  the  author ;  his  personal  literary  impulse, 
on  the  contrary,  was  always  guided  by  the  thought  of  the  audi- 
ence whom  he  was  addressing.  "  No  one  shall  find  me  rowing 
against  the  stream,"  says  the  "  Author  "  in  the  Introductory 
Epistle  to  Nigel.  "  I  care  not  who  knows  it — I  write  for  gen- 
eral amusement ;  and  though  I  will  never  aim  at  popularity  by 
what  I  think  unworthy  means,  I  will  not,  on  the  other  hand, 
be  pertinacious  in  the  defence  of  my  own  errors  against  the 
voice  of  the  public."  Of  his  last  "  apoplectic  books,"  he  wrote, 
"  I  am  ashamed,  for  the  first  time  in  my  life,  of  the  two  novels, 
but  since  the  pensive  public  have  taken  them,  there  is  no  more 
to  be  said  but  to  eat  my  pudding  and  to  hold  my  tongue."3 
Early  in  his  career  he  seems  to  have  felt  that  he  could  make 
a  good  deal  of  money  by  writing,  if  he  should  wish.4  Towards 
the  end  he  said,  "  I  know  that  no  literary  speculation  ever  suc- 
ceeded with  me  but  where  my  own  works  were  concerned ;  and 
that,  on  the  other  hand,  these  have  rarely  failed."'' 

The  popularity  of  his  own  books  was  so  great  that  they, 
required  a  special  category.  He  seemed  to  be  incapable  of 
ascribing  their  success  to  extraordinary  excellence,  and  he  set- 
tled down  to  the  opinion  that  it  was  simply  their  novelty  that 

1  Introduction  to  the  Lady  of  the  Lake ;  Lockhart,  Vol.  II,  p.  130. 

2  Introduction  to  Chronicles  of  the  Canongate. 

s  Journal,  Vol.  II,  p.  473.  4  Lockhart,  Vol.   I.  p.  355. 

5  Ibid.,  Vol.  V,  p.   164. 


120  SCOTT   AS   A   CRITIC    OF   LITERATURE 

the  public  cared  for.  The  enthusiastic  welcome  given  him  by 
the  Irish  when  he  visited  Dublin  caused  him  to  say  in  one  of 
his  letters,  "  Were  it  not  from  the  chilling  recollection  that 
novelty  is  easily  substituted  for  merit,  I  should  think,  like  the 
booby  in  Steele's  play,1  that  I  had  been  kept  back,  and  that 
there  was  something  more  about  me  than  I  had  ever  been  led 
to  suspect."2 

He  assumed  that  he  had  studied  popular  taste  enough  to  have 
some  knowledge  of  its  shiftings,  so  that  he  might  "  set  every 
sail  towards  the  breeze."3  "  I  may  be  mistaken,"  he  once 
wrote,  "  but  I  do  think  the  tale  of  Elspat  M'Tavish  in  my  bet- 
termost  manner,  but  J.  B.  roars  for  chivalry.  He  does  not 
quite  understand  that  everything  may  be  overdone  in  this 
world,  or  sufficiently  estimate  the  necessity  of  novelty.  The 
Highlanders  have  been  off  the  field  now  for  some  time." 4  His 
comment  on  Ivanhoe  was  still  more  emphatic.  "  Novelty  is 
what  this  giddy-paced  time  demands  imperiously,  and  I  cer- 
tainly studied  as  much  as  I  could  to  get  out  of  the  old  beaten 
track,  leaving  those  who  like  to  keep  the  road,  which  I  have 
rutted  pretty  well."5 

Believing  from  the  beginning  of  his  career  that  novelty  was 
the  chief  merit  of  his  work,  he  was  prepared  to  live  up  to  his 
I  principles.  So  it  was  that  when  he  was  "  beaten  "  by  Byron 
,  in  metrical  romances,  he  dropped  with  hardly  a  regret,  so  far 
as  we  can  judge,  the  kind  of  writing  in  which  he  had  attained 
such  remarkable  popularity,  and  turned  to  another  kind. 
"  Since  one  line  has  failed,  we  must  just  stick  to  something 
else,"  he  remarked,  calmly.6  This  was  when  the  small  sales 
of  The  Lord  of  the  Isles  as  compared  with  the  earlier  poems 
warned  Scott  and  his  publisher  in  a  very  tangible  way  that  the 
field  had  been  captured  by  Byron.  At  this  time  Waverley  was 
in  the  market  and  Guy  Manncring  was  in  process  of  composi- 
tion.    Though  it  was  to  his  poetry  that  he  chose  to  give  his 

1  See  the  speech  of  Humphry  Gubbin,  in  The  Tender  Husband,  Act  I, 
Sc.  2. 

2  Lockhart,  Vol.  IV,  p.  297;  see  also  Familiar  Letters,  Vol.  I,  p.  55. 
3 Lockhart,  Vol.  II,  pp.   104  and  124. 

4  Journal,  Vol.  I,  p.  222;  Lockhart,  Vol.  V,  p.   18. 

5 Lockhart,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  350.  6  Ibid.,  Vol.  II,  p.  508. 


HIS    CRITICISM    OF    HIS   OWN    WORK  121 

name,  Scott  had  little  reason  to  feel  forlorn,  as  the  sale  of  the 
novels  from  the  very  beginning  was  a  pretty  effective  consola- 
tion for  any  possible  hurt  to  his  vanity.  He  could  have  owned 
them  as  his  at  any  moment,  had  he  chosen  to  do  so.  He  did 
not  read  criticisms  of  his  books,  but  was  satisfied,  as  one  of  his 
friends  observed,  "  to  accept  the  intense  avidity  with  which  his 
novels  are  read,  the  enormous  and  continued  sale  of  his  works, 
as  a  sufficient  commendation  of  them."1  In  the  case  of  Byron, 
as  always  when  the  public  approved  the  works  of  one  of  his 
brother  authors,  he  considered  the  popular  judgment  right. 

Scott  did  not  altogether  stop  writing  poetry,  however,  as  is 
sometimes  supposed.  The  Field  of  Waterloo  and  Harold  the 
Dauntless  were  both  written  after  this  time;  and  the  mottoes 
and  lyrics  in  the  novels  compose  a  delightful  body  of  verse. 
The  fact  seems  to  be  that  he  lost  zest  for  writing  long  poems, 
partly  because  of  the  favor  with  which  Byron's  poems  were 
received,  and  his  own  consequent  feeling  of  inferiority  in 
poetic  composition ;  partly  because  of  his  discovery  of  the 
greater  ease  with  which  he  could  write  prose,  and  the  greater 
scope  it  gave  him.  The  more  ambitious  attempts  among  the 
poems  which  he  wrote  after  1814  are  comparative  failures. 
But  the  poetry  in  his  nature  prevented  him  from  entirely  giv- 
ing over  the  composition  of  verse,  and  he  found  real  delight 
in  the  occasional  writing  of  short  pieces  that  required  no  con- 
tinued effort.  They  were  usually  made  to  be  used  in  the  nov- 
els, for  after  the  publication  of  Guy  Mannermg  novel-writing 
became  specifically  Scott's  occupation.2 

xLockhart,  Vol.  IV,  p.  229. 

2  When  Constable  was  proposing  to  publish  the  poetry  of  the  novels 
separately,  Scott  wrote  to  him  that  it  was  beyond  his  own  power  to 
distinguish  what  was  original  from  what  was  borrowed,  and  suggested  the 
following  Advertisement  for  the  book : 

"  We  believe  by  far  the  greater  part  of  the  poetry  interspersed  through 
these  novels  to  be  original  compositions  by  the  author.  At  the  same  time 
the  reader  will  find  passages  which  are  quoted  from  other  authors,  and 
may  probably  debit  more  of  these  than  our  more  limited  reading  has  enabled 
us  to  ascertain.  Indeed,  it  is  our  opinion  that  some  of  the  following  poetry 
is  neither  entirely  original  nor  altogether  borrowed,  but  consists  in  some 
instances  of  passages  from  other  authors,  which  the  author  has  not  hesi- 
tated to  alter  considerably,  either  to  supply  defects  of  his  own  memory, 
or  to  adapt  the  quotation  more  explicitly  and  aptly  to  the  matter  in  hand." 
{Constable's  Correspondence,  Vol.   Ill,  pp.  222-3.) 


122  SCOTT   AS    A   CRITIC    OF   LITERATURE 

The  price  of  his  success  in  any  direction  was  that  he  was 
unable  to  keep  his  field  to  himself.  Having  set  a  fashion,  he 
was  more  than  once  annoyed  by  the  crowd  who  wrote  in  his 
I  style  and  made  him  feel  the  necessity  of  striking  out  a  new 
(line.1  It  was  comparatively  easy  for  the  vigorous  man  who 
wrote  Waverley,  but  in  the  end,  when  through  his  losses  he 
was  more  than  ever  obliged  to  hit  the  popular  taste,  to  feel 
that  he  must  find  a  new  style  seemed  a  hard  fate.  Yet  he 
meant  to  be  beforehand  in  the  race.  This  is  the  record  in  his 
Journal:  "  Hard  pressed  as  I  am  by  these  imitators,  who  must 
put  the  thing  out  of  fashion  at  last,  I  consider,  like  a  fox  at 
his  last  shifts,  whether  there  be  a  way  to  dodge  them — some 
new  device  to  throw  them  off,  and  have  a  mile  or  two  of  free 
ground  while  I  have  legs  and  wind  left  to  use  it.  There  is 
one  way  to  give  novelty :  to  depend  for  success  on  the  interest  ■ 
of  a  well-contrived  story.  But  woe's  me !  that  requires 
thought,  consideration — the  writing  out  a  regular  plan  or  plot 
— above  all,  the  adhering  to  one — which  I  never  can  do,  for 
the  ideas  rise  as  I  write,  and  bear  such  a  disproportioned  ex- 
tent to  that  which  each  occupied  at  the  first  concoction,  that 
(cocksnowns !)  I  shall  never  be  able  to  take  the  trouble;  and 
yet  to  make  the  world  stare,  and  gain  a  new  march  ahead  of 
them  all !     Well,  something  we  still  will  do."2 

By  an  easy  extension  of  his  principle,  he  came  to  believe  that 
novelty  would  always  succeed  for  a  time.  The  opinion  is  ex- 
pressed often  in  his  reviews,  and  in  his  journal  and  letters  is 
applied  to  his  own  work.  So  it  was  that  when  any  one  of  his 
books  seemed  partially  to  fail  with  the  public,  his  immediate 
impulse  was  to  look  for  something  new  to  be  done.3  One  of 
his  schemes  was  a  work  on  popular  superstitions,  projected 
when  Quentin  Durward  seemed  to  be  falling  flat;  but  the  suc- 
cess of  the  novel  made  the  immediate  execution  of  the  plan 
unnecessary.4 

1 "  I  have  taught  nearly  a  hundred  gentlemen  to  fence  very  nearly,  if 
not  altogether,  as  well  as  myself,"  he  said.  {Journal,  Vol.  I,  p.  167.  See 
also  pp.  273-5.) 

2  Journal,  Vol.  I,  pp.  275-6;  Lockhart,  Vol.  V,  p.  45. 

3  Lockhart,  Vol.  IV,  pp.  322  and  492;  Vol.  V,  p.  186. 
*Ibid.,  Vol.  IV,  p.  no. 


HIS    CRITICISM    OF    HIS    OWN    WORK  199 

It  was  largely  his  desire  to  secure  variety  that  encouraged 
him  to  undertake  historical  writing.  lie  had  also  a  theory 
about  how  history  should  be  written,  and  so  he  felt  that  the 
novelty  would  consist  in  something  more  than  the  fact  that  the 
Author  of  Waverley  had  taken  a  new  line.  He  wished,  as 
Thackeray  did  later  when  he  proposed  to  write  a  history  of  the 
Age  of  Queen  Anne,  to  use  in  an  avowedly  serious  book  the 
material  with  which  he  had  stored  his  imagination ;  and  he 
believed  he  could  present  it  with  a  vivacity  that  was  not  charac- 
teristic of  professional  historians.  The  success  of  the  first 
series  of  Tales  of  a  Grandfather  served  to  confirm  the  opinion 
he  had  expressed  about  them, — "  I  care  not  who  knows  it,  I 
think  well  of  them.  Nay,  I  will  hash  history  with  anybody, 
be  he  who  he  will."1 

Scott  had  a  very  just  sense  of  the  value  of  his  great  stores j 
of  information.  He  did  say  that  he  would  give  one  half  his 
knowledge  if  so  he  might  put  the  other  half  upon  a  well-built 
foundation,2  but  as  years  went  on  he  learned  to  use  with  ease 
the  accumulations  of  knowledge  which  in  his  youth  had  proved 
often  unwieldy ;  and  more  than  once  he  congratulated  himself 
that  he  beat  his  imitators  by  possessing  historical  and  anti- 
quarian lore  which  they  could  only  acquire  by  "  reading  up."3 
Though  he  testified  that  in  the  beginning  of  his  first  novel  he 
described  his  own  education,  he  could  hardly  apply  to  himself 
what  is  there  said  of  Waverley,  that,  "  While  he  was  thus  per- 
mitted to  read  only  for  the  gratification  of  his  amusement,  he 
foresaw  not  that  he  was  losing  forever  the  opportunity  of 
acquiring  habits  of  firm  and  assiduous  application,  of  gaining 
the  art  of  controlling,  directing,  and  concentrating  the  powers 
of  his  mind  for  earnest  investigation."4  It  was  otherwise  with 
Scott  himself.  The  result  of  the  wide  and  desultory  reading 
of  his  youth,  acting  upon  a  remarkably  strong  memory,  was  to 
put  him  into  the  position,  as  he  says,  of  "  an  ignorant  gamester, 
who  kept  a  good  hand  until  he  knew  how  to  play  it."5  So  it 
was  that  he  said  of  those  who  followed  his  lead  in  writing  his- 

1  Journal,  Vol.  II,  p.  106,  and  Lockhart,  Vol.  V,  p.  162. 

*  Lockhart,  Vol.  I,  pp.  33-4.  ' Ibid.,    Vol.    III.    p.    259. 

4  Waverley,  Vol.  I,  pp.  11 2-3.     See  also  Mackenzie's  Life  of  Scott,  p.  364. 

5  Lockhart,  Vol.  I,  p.  29. 


124  SCOTT   AS    A    CRITIC    OF   LITERATURE 

torical  novels,  "  They  may  do  their  fooling  with  better  grace ; 
but  I,  like  Sir  Andrew  Aguecheek,  do  it  more  natural."1  His 
knowledge  of  history  and  antiquities  was  that  part  of  his  intel- 
lectual equipment  in  which  he  seemed  to  take  most  pride.  He 
had  the  highest  opinion  of  the  value  of  historical  study  for 
ripening  men's  judgment  of  current  affairs,2  and  indeed  there 
were  few  relations  of  life  in  which  an  acquaintance  with  his- 
tory did  not  seem  to  him  indispensable. 

But  he  felt  that  historical  writing  had  not  been  adapted  "  to 
the  demands  of  the  increased  circles  among  which  literature 
does  already  find  its  way."3  Accordingly  he  resolved  to  use 
in  the  service  of  history  that  "  knack  .  .  .  for  selecting  the 
striking  and  interesting  points  out  of  dull  details,"  which  he 
felt  was  his  endowment.4  The  original  introduction  to  the 
Tales  of  the  Crusaders  has  the  following  burlesque  announce- 
ment of  his  intention,  in  the  words  of  the  Eidolon  Chairman : 
"  I  intend  to  write  the  most  wonderful  book  which  the  world 
ever  read — a  book  in  which  every  incident  shall  be  incredible, 
yet  strictly  true — a  work  recalling  recollections  with  which  the 
ears  of  this  generation  once  tingled,  and  which  shall  be  read 
by  our  children  with  an  admiration  approaching  to  incredulity. 
Such  shall  be  the  Life  of  Napoleon,  by  the  Author  of  Waver- 
ley."  He  wished  to  controvert  "  the  vulgar  opinion  that  the 
flattest  and  dullest  mode  of  detailing  events  must  uniformly 
be  that  which  approaches  nearest  to  the  truth."6  There  is  no 
doubt  that  his  histories  are  readable,  yet  we  feel  that  Southey 
was  right  in  his  comment  on  the  Life  of  Napoleon, — "  It  was 
not  possible  that  Sir  Walter  could  keep  up  as  a  historian  the 
character  which  he  had  obtained  as  a  novelist ;  and  in  the  first 
announcement  of  this  '  Life  '  he  had,  not  very  wisely,  promised 
something  as  stimulating  as  his  novels.  Alas !  he  forgot  that 
there  could  be  no  stimulus  of  curiosity  in  it."6  A  recent  critic 
has  said,  "  Scott  lost  half  his  power  of  vitalizing  the  past  when 

1  Journal,  Vol.  I,  pp.  274-5  ;  Lockhart,  Vol.  V,  p.  44.  See  also  his  review 
of  Godwin's  Life  of  Chaucer. 

2  Lockhart,  Vol.  IV,  p.   103.  3Ibid.,  Vol.  IV,  p.  260. 
*  Journal,  Vol.  II,  p.  96. 

5  Review  of  Tytler's  History  of  Scotland,  Quarterly,  November,   1829. 

6  Southey' s  Letters,  Vol.  IV,  p.  62. 


BIS    CRITICISM    OF    BIS   OWN    WORK  125 

he  sat  down  Formally  t<>  record  it — when  he  turned  from  his 
marvellous  recreation  of  James  T.  to  give  a  laboured  hnt  very 
ordinary  portrait  of  Napoleon."1  His  partial  failnre  in  this 
instance  may  have  been  due  to  an  unfortunate  choice  of  sub- 
ject. Only  a  few  years  before  he  wrote  the  book  Scott  had 
been  thinking  of  Napoleon  as  a  "  tyrannical  monster,"2  a 
"  singular  emanation  of  the  Evil  Principle,"3  "  the  arch-enemy 
of  mankind,'" — phrases  which,  in  spite  of  their  vividness, 
hardly  seem  to  promise  a  life-like  portrayal  of  the  man.5 

In  one  notable  respect,  Scott's  conception  of  how  history 
should  be  written  was  very  modern :  he  would  depict  the  life 
of  the  people,  not  simply  the  actions  of  kings  and  statesmen. 
His  historical  novels,  said  Carlyle,  "  taught  all  men  this  truth, 
which  looks  like  a  truism,  and  yet  was  as  good  as  unknown  to 
writers  of  history  and  others,  till  so  taught :  that  the  bygone 
ages  of  the  world  were  actually  filled  by  living  men,  not  by 
protocols,  state-papers,  controversies,  and  abstractions  of  men."6 
One  who  has  the  academic  notion  that  a  novel,  to  be  great, 
must  be  written  with  no  ulterior  purpose,  is  almost  startled  to 
observe  how  definitely  Scott  considered  it  the  function  of  his 
novels  to  portray  ancient  manners.  Speaking  of  old  romances 
as  a  source  which  we  may  use  for  studying  about  our  ancestors, 
he  said :  "  From  the  romance,  we  learn  what  they  were ;  from  the 
history,  what  they  did :  and  were  we  to  be  deprived  of  one  of 
these  two  kinds  of  information,  it  might  well  be  made  a  ques- 
tion, which  is  most  useful  or  interesting."7  He  wished  to  make 
his  own  romances  serve  much  the  same  purpose  as  those  writ- 
ten in  the  midst  of  the  customs  which  they  unconsciously  re- 
flected. Of  Waverley  he  said,  "  It  may  really  boast  to  be  a 
tolerably  faithful  portrait  of  Scottish  manners."^  He  inter- 
rupts the  story  of  The  Pirate  to  describe  the  charm  of  the 

1  Herford's  Age  of  Wordsworth,  pp.  39-40. 

2  Lockhart,  Vol.  II,  p.  60.  3 Paul's  Letters,  Letter  XVI. 
4 Lockhart,  Vol.  II,  p.  320. 

5  On  Goethe's  favorable  opinion  of  the  Napoleon,  see  a  letter  given  in 
the  appendix  to  Scott's  Journal  (Vol.  II,  pp.  485-6  and  note). 

6  Carlyle's  Essay  on  Scott.  See  also  Taine's  History  of  English  Litera- 
ture, Introduction,   I. 

7  Review  of  Metrical  Romances,  Edinburgh  Review,  January,  1806. 
8 Lockhart,  Vol.  II,  p.  333. 


126  SCOTT   AS    A    CRITIC    OF   LITERATURE 

leaden  heart,  and  offers  this  excuse :  "  As  this  simple  and  orig- 
inal remedy  is  peculiar  to  the  isles  of  Thule,  it  were  unpardon- 
able not  to  preserve  it  at  length,  in  a  narrative  connected  with 
Scottish  antiquities."1  His  comment  on  Ivanhoe  was  as  fol- 
lows :  "  I  am  convinced  that  however  I  myself  may  fail  in  the 
ensuing  attempt,  yet,  with  more  labour  in  collecting,  or  more 
skill  in  using,  the  materials  within  his  reach,  illustrated  as  they 
have  been  by  the  labours  of  Dr.  Henry,  of  the  late  Mr.  Strutt, 
and  above  all,  of  Mr.  Sharon  Turner,  an  abler  hand  would  have 
been  successful."2 

Scott's  early  reading  was  only  the  basis  for  the  research  that 
he  undertook  afterwards.3  Much  of  this  later  study  was  accom- 
plished when  he  was  engaged  upon  such  books  as  Sowers? 
Tracts,  Dryden's  and  Swiff s  Works,  and  the  other  historical 
publications  that  make  the  bibliography  of  Scott  so  surprising 
to  the  ordinary  reader;  but  some  of  his  investigations  were 
undertaken  specifically  for  the  novels.  The  Literary  Corre- 
spondence of  his  publisher,  Archibald  Constable,  contains  many 
evidences  of  Scott's  efforts,  assisted  often  by  Constable,  to  get 
antiquarian  and  topographical  details  correct  in  the  novels.  In 
1 82 1  Constable  suggested  that  Sir  Walter  write  a  story  of  the 
time  of  James  I.  of  England,  and  was  told,  "  If  you  can  suggest 
anything  about  the  period  I  will  be  happy  to  hear  from  you ; 
you  are  always  happy  in  your  hints."4  Some  years  earlier  the 
author  and  the  publisher  had  a  correspondence  concerning  a 
series  of  letters  on  the  history  of  Scotland  which  the  former 
was  planning  to  write,  and  which  he  wished  to  publish  anony- 
mously for  the  following  reason :  "  I  have  not  the  least  doubt 
that  I  will  make  a  popular  book,  for  I  trust  it  will  be  both  inter- 
esting and  useful ;  but  I  never  intended  to  engage  in  any  proper 
historical  labour,  for  which  I  have  neither  time,  talent,  nor 

1The  Pirate,  Vol.  II,  p.  138. 

2  Introductory  Epistle  to  Ivanhoe.  Freeman,  in  his  Norman  Conquest, 
vigorously  attacks  Ivanhoe  for  its  unwarranted  picture  of  the  relations 
between  Saxons  and  Normans  in  the  thirteenth  century.  (Vol.  V,  pp.  551— 
561.) 

3  Mr.  Lang  points  out  that  he  made  many  written  notes  of  his  reading, 
as  we  should  hardly  expect  a  man  of  his  unrivalled  memory  to  do.  (Life 
of  Scott,  p.  27.) 

4  Constable's  Correspondence,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  161. 


BIS    CRITICISM    OF    HIS   OWN    WORK  127 

inclination.  ...  In  truth  it  would  take  ten  years  of  any  man's 
life  to  write  such  a  History  of  Scotland  as  he  should  put  his 
name  to."1  He  called  his  Napoleon  "  the  most  severe  and 
laborious  undertaking  which  choice  or  accident  ever  placed  on 
my  shoulders."2 

More  than  once  Scott  expresses  the  opinion  that  though 
novels  may  be  useful  to  arouse  curiosity  about  history,  and  to 
impart  some  knowledge  to  people  who  will  not  do  any  serious 
thinking,  they  may,  on  the  other  hand,  work  harm  by  satisfy- 
ing with  their  superficial  information  those  who  would  other- 
wise read  history.3  It  seems  as  if  he  designed  the  Life  of 
Napoleon  and  the  History  of  Scotland  for  a  new  reading  class 
that  the  novels  had  been  creating,  and  as  if  he  wished  to  make 
the  step  of  transition  not  too  long.  We  can  almost  fancy  them 
as  a  series  of  graded  books  arranged  to  lead  the  people  of 
Great  Britain  up  to  a  sufficient  height  of  historical  information. 
The  Tales  of  a  Grandfather  were  intended  for  the  beginners 
who  had  never  been  infected  by  the  common  heresy  concerning 
the  dulness  of  history,  and  who  were  blessed  with  sufficiently 
active  imagination  to  make  the  sugar-coating  of  fiction 
superfluous.4 

1  Constable's  Correspondence,  Vol.  Ill,  pp.  93-4. 

2 Letters  of  Lady  Louisa  Stuart,  p.  247. 

3  Mr.  Lang's  theory  that  Scott  was  responsible  for  a  decline  in  serious 
reading  cannot  be  either  proved  or  refuted  completely,  but  more  than  one 
man  has  given  personal  testimony  concerning  the  stimulating  effect  of  the 
Waverley  novels.  Thierry's  Norman  Conquest  was  directly  inspired  by 
Ivanhoe,  and  with  Ivanhoe  is  condemned  by  Freeman  for  its  mistaken 
views.  Mr.  Andrew  D.  White  says  in  his  Autobiography  that  Quentin 
Duncard  and  Anne  of  Geierstein  led  him  to  see  the  first  that  he  had  ever 
clearly  discerned  of  the  great  principles  that  "  lie  hidden  beneath  the  sur- 
face of  events  " — "  the  secret  of  the  centralization  of  power  in  Europe, 
and  of  the  triumph  of  monarchy  over  feudalism."      (Vol.  I,  pp.   15-16.) 

*  Scott  had  theories  as  to  what  children's  books  ought  to  be.  They 
should  stir  the  imagination,  he  said,  instead  of  simply  imparting  knowledge 
as  certain  scientific  books  attempted  to  do.  (Lockhart,  Vol.  II,  p.  27.) 
But  he  seriously  objected  to  any  attempt  to  write  down  to  the  understand- 
ing of  children.  Of  the  Tales  of  a  Grandfather  he  said  :  "  I  will  make,  if 
possible,  a  book  that  a  child  shall  understand,  yet  a  man  will  feel  some, 
temptation  to  peruse,  should  he  chance  to  take  it  up."  (Lockhart,  Vol. 
V,  p.  ii2.  See  also  ib.,  Vol.  I,  p.  19.)  Anatole  France  has  expressed  ideas 
about  children's  books  which  ate  practically  the  same  as  those  of  Scott. 
(See  Le  Livre  de  Mon  Ami,  3me    partie  :  "  A  Madame  D   *   *   *   .") 


128  SCOTT   AS    A   CRITIC    OF   LITERATURE 

But  great  as  was  the  interest  that  Scott  took  in  the  historical 
aspect  of  his  work,  his  artistic  sense  guided  his  use  of  materials, 
and  he  was  well  aware  of  the  danger  of  over-working  the  mine. 
The  principles  on  which  he  chose  periods  and  events  to  repre- 
sent are  illustrated  in  many  of  the  introductions.  Of  The  For- 
tunes of  Nigel  he  said:  "The  reign  of  James  I.,  in  which 
George  Heriot  flourished,  gave  unbounded  scope  to  invention 
in  the  fable,  while  at  the  same  time  it  afforded  greater  variety 
and  discrimination  of  character  than  could,  with  historical  con- 
sistency, have  been  introduced  if  the  scene  had  been  laid  a  cen- 
tury earlier."1 

His  first  published  attempt  at  fiction-writing  was  a  conclu- 
sion to  the  novel,  Queenhoo-Hall,2  of  which  his  opinion  was 
that  it  would  never  be  popular  because  antiquarian  knowledge 
was  displayed  in  it  too  liberally.  "  The  author,"  he  says, 
"  forgot  .  .  .  that  extensive  neutral  ground,  the  large  propor- 
tion, that  is,  of  manners  and  sentiments  which  are  common  to 
us  and  to  our  ancestors,  having  been  handed  down  unaltered 
from  them  to  us,  or  which,  arising  out  of  the  principles  of  our 
common  nature,  must  have  existed  in  either  state  of  society."3 
Scott's  practice  in  regard  to  the  language  of  his  historical 
novels  was  based  on  much  the  same  theory.  He  intended  to 
admit  "  no  word  or  turn  of  phraseology  betraying  an  origin 
directly  modern,"4  but  to  avoid  obsolete  words  for  the  most 
part ;  and  he  never  attempted  to  follow  with  fidelity  the  style 
of  the  exact  age  of  which  he  was  writing.  The  translation  of 
Froissart  by  Lord  Berners  seemed  to  him  a  sufficiently  good 
model  to  serve  for  the  whole  mediaeval  period.5  In  his  review 
of  Tales  of  My  Landlord  he  says  of  the  proem  to  his  book :  "  It 
is  written  in  the  quaint  style  of  that  prefixed  by  Gay  to  his 
Pastorals,  being,  as  Johnson  terms  it,  '  such  imitation  as  he 

1  Introduction  to   The  Fortunes  of  Nigel. 

2  See  the  Introduction  to  Waverley. 

3  Introductory  Epistle  to  Ivanhoe. 

4 Ibid.  In  Old  Mortality,  Claverhouse  was  made  to  use  the  phrase  "sen- 
timental speeches,"  but  when  Lady  Louisa  Stuart  pointed  out  to  Scott  that 
the  word  "  sentimental  "  was  modern,  he  struck  it  out  of  the  second  edition. 

6  Introductory  Epistle  to  Ivanhoe.  For  other  references  to  the  use  of 
a  moderately  antique  diction  see  the  essays  on  Walpole  and  Clara  Reeve 
in  Lives  of  the  Novelists,  and  the  review  of  Southey's  Amadis  de  Gaul, 
Edinburgh  Review,  October,  1803. 


BIS    CRITICISM    OF    HIS    OWN    WORK  129 

could  obtain  of  obsolete  language,  and  by  consequence,  in  a 
style  that  was  never  written  or  spoken  in  any  age  or  place.'  " 

1  [is  Journal  contains  observations  on  several  bistorical  novels 
which  were  of  little  consequence,  as,  for  example,  on  one  by  a 
Mr.  Bell, — "  He  goes  not  the  way  to  write  it ;  he  is  too  general, 
and  not  sufficiently  minute "  j1  and  on  The  Spac-Wifc,  by 
Gait, — "  He  has  made  his  story  difficult  to  understand,  by 
adopting  a  region  of  history  little  known."2  On  the  other 
hand  he  remarked,  when  someone  had  suggested  a  number  of 
historical  subjects  to  him, — "  People  will  not  consider  that  a 
thing  may  already  be  so  well  told  in  history,  that  romance 
ought  not  in  prudence  to  meddle  with  it "  ;8  and  at  another  time 
he  spoke  of  "  the  usual  habit  of  antiquarians,"  to  "  neglect  what 
is  useful  for  things  that  are  merely  curious."4 

Aside  from  the  familiar  knowledge  of  ancient  manners  which 
he  thought  enabled  him  to  give  his  tales  the  necessary  touch  of 
novelty,  and  from  the  "  hurried  frankness,"  or  spontaneity  of 
style  which  endowed  them  with  vitality,  Scott  believed  that  his\ 
talents  included  a  special  knack  at  description.  He  felt,  how- 
ever, that  a  sense  of  the  picturesque  in  action  was  a  different, 
thing  from  a  similar  perception  in  regard  to  scenery,  and  that 
though  the  first  was  natural  to  him,  he  was  obliged  to  use 
effort  to  develop  the  second.5  Some  study  of  drawing  in 
his  youth  helped  him  to  comprehend  the  demands  of  per- 
spective, and  he  endeavored  to  carry  out  the  principle  of  de- 
scribing a  scene  in  the  way  in  which  it  would  naturally  strike 
the  spectator,  neither  overloading  with  confused  detail  nor 
over-emphasizing  what  should  be  subordinate.6  That  his  plan 
was  consciously  adopted  may  be  seen  from  his  discussion  of 
Byron's  skill  in  description  and  from  his  comments  on  the 
descriptive  passages  of  the  mediaeval  romances.7 

1  Journal.  Vol.   II,  p.  226.  s  Ibid..  Vol.  II.  p.  216. 

2 Ibid.,  Vol.  II,  p.  319.  */&«*.,  Vol.   I,  p.  223. 

5 Lockhart,  Vol.  I,  p.  40. 

6  Introduction  to  Chronicles  of  the  Canongatc.  See  also  Letters  to  Hebcr, 
pp.  128-32,  and  154;  and  Ruskin's  analysis  of  Scott's  descriptions:  Modern 
Painters,  Part  IV,  ch.  16,  %  23  ft. 

7  See  particularly  his  reviews  of  Childe  Harold,  Canto  III,  Quarterly, 
October,  1816  ;  and  of  Southey's  translation  of  the  Amadis  dc  Gaul,  Edin- 
burgh Review,  October,  1803. 

9 


130  SCOTT   AS   A    CRITIC    OF   LITERATURE 

At  the  same  time  he  understood  the  advantages  of  the  real- 
istic method.  On  one  occasion  he  stated  as  his  creed,  "  that 
in  nature  herself  no  two  scenes  were  exactly  alike,  and  that 
whoever  copied  truly  what  was  before  his  eyes  would  possess 
the  same  variety  in  his  descriptions,  and  exhibit  apparently  an 
imagination  as  boundless  as  the  range  of  nature  in  the  scenes 
he  recorded ;  whereas,  whoever  trusted  to  imagination  would 
soon  find  his  own  mind  circumscribed  and  contracted  to  a  few 
favourite  images,  and  the  repetition  of  these  would  sooner  or 
later  produce  that  very  monotony  and  barrenness  which  had 
always  haunted  descriptive  poetry  in  the  hands  of  any  but  the 
patient  worshippers  of  truth."1  Wordsworth  disapproved  of 
Scott's  method  in  description.  He  is  quoted  as  having  said : 
"  Nature  does  not  permit  an  inventory  to  be  made  of  her 
charms !  He  should  have  left  his  pencil  and  note-book  at  home 
[and]  fixed  his  eye  as  he  walked  with  a  reverent  attention  on 
all  that  surrounded  him."2  Somewhat  like  a  rejoinder  sounds 
another  remark  of  Scott's,  in  phrases  that  Wordsworth  would 
have  detested.  Scott  said  cheerfully,  "  As  to  the  actual  study 
of  nature,  if  you  mean  the  landscape  gardening  of  poetry.  .  .  . 
I  can  get  on  quite  as  well  from  recollection,  while  sitting  in  the 
Parliament  house,  as  if  wandering  through  wood  and  wold."3 
At  another  time  he  said,  "  If  a  man  will  paint  from  nature,  he 
will  be  likely  to  amuse  those  who  are  daily  looking  at  it."4 
st  Though  Scott  prided  himself  somewhat  on  his  descriptive 
powers  he  realized  that  he  could  not  do  his  best  work  on  minute 
canvases.  We  have  already  seen  how  he  contrasted  himself 
with  Jane  Austen.  "  The  exquisite  touch,"  he  said,  "  which 
renders  ordinary  commonplace  things  and  characters  interest- 
ing from  the  truth  of  the  description  and  the  sentiment,  is 
denied  to  me."5 

Of  Scott's  opinion  in  regard  to  the  ethical  effect  of  novels,  I 

1  Lockhart,  Vol.  II,  pp.  232-3. 

2  Quoted  in  Wordsworth  (English  Men  of  Letters)   by  F.  W.  H.  Myers, 

P-  143- 

3  Recollections  of  Scott,  by  R.  P.  Gillies.     Fraser's,  xii :  254. 
4 Lockhart,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  62. 

5 Journal,  Vol.  I,  p.   155,  and  Vol.  II,  p.  37;  Lockhart,  Vol.  IV,  p.  476, 
and  Vol.  V,  p.  380. 


HIS    CRITICISM    OF    HIS   OWN    WORK  131 

have  already  spoken.1  The  fact  that  he  refused  to  use  the  con- 
ventional plea  of  a  desire  to  improve  public  morals,  and  that 
he  understood  how  little  a  reader  is  really  influenced  by  the 
exalted  sentiments  of  heroes  of  fiction,  gave  Carlyle  a  fit  of 
righteous  indignation;2  but  it  is  futile  to  say  that  Scott  "had 
no  message  to  deliver  to  the  world."  He  might  have  retorted, 
in  the  words  which  he  once  used  about  Homer, — "  Doubtless 
an  admirable  moral  may  be  often  extracted  from  his  poem; 
because  it  contains  an  accurate  picture  of  human  nature,  which 
can  never  be  truly  presented  without  conveying  a  lesson  of  in- 
struction. But  it  may  shrewdly  be  suspected  that  the  moral 
was  as  little  intended  by  the  author  as  it  would  have  been  the 
object  of  an  historian,  whose  work  is  equally  pregnant  with 
morality,  though  a  detail  of  facts  be  only  intended."3  It  was 
a  comfort  to  Scott  at  the  end  of  his  life  to  reflect  that  the  ten- 
dency of  all  he  had  written  was  morally  good,4  and  we  can 
well  believe  that  he  was  pleased  by  the  enthusiastic  tribute  of 
his  young  critic,  J.  L.  Adolphus,  who  said  of  his  books :  "  There 
is  not  an  unhandsome  action  or  degrading  sentiment  recorded 
of  any  person  who  is  recommended  to  the  full  esteem  of  the 
reader."5 

That  Scott  considered  poetical  power  very  important  for  a 
writer  of  novels,  he  made  evident  in  his  Lives  of  the  Novelists. 
Mr.  Herford  has  said,  but  surely  without  good  reason,  that 
Scott  wholly  lacked  the  sense  of  mystery,  and  that  in  this  re- 
spect Mrs.  Radcliffe  was  more  modern  than  he.6  Yet  it  was 
Scott  who  censured  Mrs.  Radcliffe  for  explaining  her  mysteries. 
He  had  a  vein  of  superstition  in  his  nature,  too,  about  which  he 
might  have  said,  using  the  words  given  to  a  character  in  one  of 
his  stories, — "  It  soothes  my  imagination,  without  influencing 
my  reason  or  conduct."7  A  liking  for  the  wonderful  and  ter- 
rible, which  he  felt  from  his  earliest  childhood,  was  one  mani- 
festation of  a  poetical  temperament  which  is  so  apparent  that 
there  is  no  need  of  reciting  the  evidence.     The  poetical  quali- 

1  In  the  discussion  of  Lives  of  the  Novelists. 

2  See  his  Essay  on  Scott.  3Drydcn,  Vol.   XIV,  p.   136. 
4 Lockhart,  Vol.  V,  p.  415,   and  Introductory   Epistle  to  Nigel. 

5  Letters  to  Heber,  p.  44. 

°Op.  cit.,  p.  120.  '  My   Aunt  Margaret's  Mirror. 


132  SCOTT  AS  A  CRITIC  OF  LITERATURE 

ties  in  the  Waverley  novels  gave  Adolphus  one  of  his  favorite 
arguments  in  the  attempt  to  prove  that  Scott  was  the  author. 

Yet  Scott  seemed  to  feel  that  his  position  as  a  writer  of 
popular  fiction,  however  much  the  novel  is  capable  of  being 
the  vehicle  of  imagination  and  poetical  power,  was  not  a  really 
high  one.  James  Ballantyne  persuaded  him  to  omit  from  one 
of  his  introductions  a  passage  that  seemed  to  belittle  the  occu- 
pation of  his  life,1  but  in  the  introduction  to  The  Abbot  he 
wrote :  "  Though  it  were  worse  than  affectation  to  deny  that 
my  vanity  was  satisfied  at  my  success  in  the  department  in 
which  chance  had  in  some  measure  enlisted  me,  I  was  never- 
theless far  from  thinking  that  the  novelist  or  romance-writer 
stands  high  in  the  ranks  of  literature."  The  ideal  which  he  set 
for  himself  is  indicated  in  the  following  passage  of  his  article 
on  Tales  of  My  Landlord:  "  If  .  .  .  the  features  of  an  age  gone 
by  can  be  recalled  in  a  spirit  of  delineation  at  once  faithful  and 
striking  .  .  .  the  composition  is  in  every  point  of  view  dig- 
nified and  improved ;  and  the  author,  leaving  the  light  and  friv- 
olous associates  with  whom  a  careless  observer  would  be  dis- 
posed to  ally  him,  takes  his  seat  on  the  bench  of  the  historians 
C  of  his  time  and  country."  He  once  expressed  the  opinion  that 
the  historical  romance  approaches,  in  some  measure,  when  it  is 
nobly  executed,  to  the  epic  in  poetry.2  When  a  medal  of  Scott, 
engraved  from  the  bust  by  Chantrey,  was  struck  off,  he  sug- 
gested the  motto  which  was  used : 

"  Bardorum  citharas  patrio  qui  reddidit  Istro," 
;and  said,  "  because  I  am  far  more  vain  of  having  been  able  to 
fix  some  share  of  public  attention  upon  the  ancient  poetry  and 
manners  of  my  country,  than  of  any  original  efforts  which  I 
have  been  able  to  make  in  literature."3  The  following  com- 
Jmendation,  which  he  wrote  for  a  book  of  portraits  accompanied 
by  essays,  might  be  made  to  apply  to  his  novels :"  It  is  impos- 
sible for  me  to  conceive  a  work  which  ought  to  be  more  inter- 
esting to  the  present  age  than  that  which  exhibits  before  our 

eyes  our  '  fathers  as  they  lived '  "4     He  felt  strongly  the  value  1 

1 

1  Journal,  Vol.  II,  p.  8. 

2  Review  of   Hoffmann's  Novels,  Foreign   Quarterly  Review,  July,    1827. 

3  Letters  to  R.  Polwhele,  etc.,  p.  102. 

4  Lodge's  Illustrious  Personages,  Preface. 


HIS    CRITICISM    OF    MIS   OWN    WORK  133 

and  importance  of  past  manners,  faiths  and  ideals  for  the  pres- 
ent, and  from  this  point  of  view  took  satisfaction  in  the  social 
and  ethical  teaching  of  his  novels. 

On  the  whole,  Scott's  opinions  about  his  own  work  fitted  well 
with  his  general  literary  principles,  except  that  his  modesty 
inclined  him  to  discount  his  own  performance  while  he  over- 
estimated that  of  others.  With  this  qualification  we  may  re- 
member that  he  always  spoke  sensibly  about  his  work,  without 
affectation,  and  with  abundant  geniality.  We  are  reminded  of 
the  comment  on  Moliere  quoted  by  Scott  from  a  French 
writer, — "  He  had  the  good  fortune  to  escape  the  most  dan- 
gerous fault  of  an  author  writing  upon  his  own  compositions, 
and  to  exhibit  wit,  where  some  people  would  only  have  shown 
vanity  and  self-conceit."1 

1  Article  on  Moliere,  Foreign  Quarterly  Review,  February,  1828. 


CHAPTER   VI 

Scott's  Position  as  Critic 

Comparison  of  Scott  with  Jeffrey  and  with  the  Romantic  critics— 
His  criticism  largely  appreciative — Romantic  in  special  cases  and  Au- 
gustan in  attitude— Comparison  with  Coleridge— Scott's  respect  for  the 
verdict  of  the  public — His  opinion  that  elucidation  is  the  function  oi 
criticism — Use  of  historical  illustration — Hesitation  about  analysing 
poetry— Political  criticism — Verdict  of  his  contemporaries  on  his  criti- 
cism— Influence  as  a  critic — Literary  prophecies— Character  of  his  criti- 
cal work  as  a  whole— His  attitude  towards  it — Lack  of  system — Broad 
fields  he  covered— His  greatness  a  reason  for  the  importance  of  his 
criticism. 

Important  as  Scott's  poetry  was  in  the  English  Romantic 
revival,  as  a  critic  he  can  hardly  be  counted  among  the  Roman- 
ticists. His  attitude,  nevertheless,  differed  radically  from  that 
of  the  school  represented  by  Jeffrey  and  Gifford.  We  have 
already  seen  that  he  disliked  their  manner  of  reviewing,  and 
that  he  was  conscious  of  complete  disagreement  with  Jeffrey 
in  regard  to  poetic  ideals.  Of  Jeffrey  Mr.  Gates  has  said: 
"  [He]  rarely  appreciates  a  piece  of  literature.  .  .  .  He  is 
always  for  or  against  his  author ;  he  is  always  making  points."1 
That  Scott  was  influenced  in  his  early  critical  work  by  the  tone 
of  the  Edinburgh  Review  is  undeniable,  but  temperamentally 
he  was  inclined  to  give  any  writer  a  fair  chance  to  stir  his  emo- 
tions ;  and  he  did  not  adopt  the  magisterial  mood  that  dictated 
the  famous  remark,  "  This  will  never  do."  Scott's  style  lacked 
the  adroitness  and  pungency  which  helped  Jeffrey  successfully 
to  take  the  attitude  of  the  censor,  and  which  made  his  satire 
triumphant  among  his  contemporaries.  Scott  declined,  more- 
over, to  cultivate  skill  in  a  method  which  he  considered  unfair. 
Compared  with  Jeffrey's  his  criticism  wanted  incisiveness,  but 
it  wears  better. 

The  period  was  transitional,  and  Jeffrey  did  not  go  so  far 
as  Scott  in  breaking  away  from  the  dictation  of  his  predeces- 
sors.    But  his  attitude  was  on  the  whole  more  modern  than 

1  Three  Studies  in  Literature,  p.  12. 

134 


HIS    POSITION    AS   CRITIC  135 

the  reader  would  infer  from  the  following  sentence  in  one  of  his 
earliest  reviews  :  "  Poetry  has  this  much  at  least  in  common  with 
religion,  that  its  standards  were  fixed  long  ago  by  certain  inspired 

writers,  whose  authority  it  is  no  longer  lawful  to  call  in  ques- 
tion."1 He  considered  himself  ratlur  an  interpreter  of  public 
opinion  than  a  judge  defining-  ancient  legislation,  but  he  used 
the  opinion  of  himself  and  like-minded  men  as  an  unimpeach- 
able test  of  what  the  greater  public  ought  to  believe  in  regard 
to  literature.  We  may  remember  that  the  enthusiasm  over  the 
Elizabethan  dramatists  which  seems  a  special  property  of  Lamb 
and  Hazlitt,  and  which  Scott  shared,  was  characteristic  also  of 
Jeffrey"  himself.  It  was  Jeffrey's  dogmatism  and  his  repug- 
nance to  certain  fundamental  ideas  which  were  to  become 
dominant  in  the  poetry  of  the  nineteenth  century  that  lead  us 
to  consider  him  one  of  the  last  representatives  of  the  eighteenth 
century  critical  tradition.  Scott  praised  the  Augustan  writers 
as  warmly  as  Jeffrey  did,  but  he  was  more  hospitable  to  the 
newer  literary  impulse.  "  Perhaps  the  most  damaging  accusa- 
tion that  can  be  made  against  Jeffrey  as  a  critic,"  says  Mr. 
Gates,  "  is  inability  to  read  and  interpret  the  age  in  which  he 
lived."2 

Scott's  criticism  was  largely  appreciative,  but  appreciative 
on  a  somewhat  different  plane  from  that  of  the  contemporary 
critics  whom  we  are  accustomed  to  place  in  a  more  modern 
school :  Hazlitt,  Hunt,  Lamb,  and  Coleridge.  His  judgments 
were  less  delicate  and  subtle  than  the  judgments  of  these  men 
were  apt  to  be,  and  more  "  reasonable "  in  the  eighteenth- 
century  sense ;  they  were  marked,  however,  by  a  regard  for  the 
imagination  that  would  have  seemed  most  unreasonable  to 
many  men  of  the  eighteenth  century. 

Scott  had  not  a  fixed  theory  of  literature  which  could  domi- 
nate his  mind  when  he  approached  any  work.  He  was  open- 
minded,  and  in  spite  of  his  extreme  fondness  for  the  poetry 
of  Dr.  Johnson  he  was  apt  to  be  on  the  Romantic  side  in  any 
specific  critical  utterance.  We  have  seen  also  that  he  resem- 
bled the  Romanticists  in  his  power  to  disengage  his  verdicts 

1  Edinburgh  Review,  No.  i,  October,  1802:  review  of  Thalaba. 

2  Three  Studies  in  Literature,  p.  38. 


136  SCOTT   AS    A   CRITIC    OF   LITERATURE 

on  literature  from  ethical  considerations.  On  the  other  hand 
he  seems  always  to  have  deferred  to  the  standard  authorities 
of  the  classical  criticism  of  his  time  when  his  own  knowledge 
was  not  sufficient  to  guide  him.  In  discussing  Roscommon's 
Essay  on  Translated  Verse  he  wrote :  "  It  must  be  remembered 
that  the  rules  of  criticism,  now  so  well  known  as  to  be  even 
trite  and  hackneyed,  were  then  almost  new  to  the  literary 
world."1 

Perhaps  the  main  reason  why  one  would  not  class  Scott's 
critical  work  with  that  of  the  Romanticists  is  that  he  had  no 
desire  to  proclaim  a  new  era  in  creative  literature  or  in  criti- 
cism. Like  the  Romanticists  he  was  ready  to  substitute  "  for 
the  absolute  method  of  judging  by  reference  to  an  external 
standard  of  '  taste,'  a  method  at  once  imaginative  and  histori- 
cal "  ;2  yet  he  talked  less  about  imagination  than  about  good 
sense.  The  comparison  with  Boileau  suggests  itself,  for  Scott 
admired  that  critic  in  the  conventional  fashion,  calling  him  "  a 
supereminent  authority,"3  and  Boileau  also  had  said  much  about 
"  reason  and  good  sense."  But  Scott  had  an  appreciation  of 
the  furor  poetiats  that  made  "  good  sense  "  quite  a  different 
thing  to  him  from  what  it  was  to  Boileau.  He  did  not  say, 
moreover,  that  the  poet  should  be  supremely  characterized  by 
good  sense,  but  that  the  critic,  recognizing  the  facts  about 
human  emotion,  should  make  use  of  that  quality. 

The  subjective  process  by  which  experience  is  transmuted 
into  literature  engaged  Scott's  attention  very  little :  in  this  re- 
spect also  he  stands  apart  from  the  newer  school  of  critics. 
The  metaphysical  description  of  imagination  or  fancy  inter- 
ested him  less  than  the  piece  of  literature  in  which  these  quali- 
ties were  exhibited.  His  own  mental  activities  were  more 
easily  set  in  motion  than  analysed,  and  the  introspective  or 
philosophical  attitude  of  mind  was  unnatural  to  him.  Because 
of  his  adoption  of  the  historical  method  of  studying  literature, 
and  the  similarity  of  many  of  his  judgments  to  those  which 
were  in  general  characteristic  of  the  Romantic  school,  we  may 
say  that  Scott's  criticism  looks  forward ;  but  it  shows  the  influ- 

1  Dryden,  Vol.  XI,  p.  26. 

2  Herford,  'op.  cit.,  pp.  51-2.  3  Essay  on  the  Drama. 


HIS    POSH  [ON    AS   CRITIC  137 

ence  of  the  earlier  period  in  its  acceptance  of  traditional  judg- 
ments based  on  external  standards  which  disregarded  the  nature 
of  the  creative  process. 

From  Coleridge  Scott  is  separated  in  the  most  definite  way. 
Coleridge  began  at  the  foundation,  building  up  a  set  of  princi- 
ples such  as  the  new  impulse  in  literature  seemed  to  demand. 
Scott  preferred  the  concrete,  and  was  stimulated  by  the  particu- 
lar book  to  express  opinions  that  would  never  have  come  to 
his  mind  as  the  result  of  pursuing  a  train  of  unembodied  ideas. 
Coleridge's  judgments,  moreover,  would  be  unaffected  by  pub- 
lic estimation,  for  he  sought  to  found  them  on  the  spiritual  and 
philosophic  consciousness  that  exists  apart  from  the  crowd.1 
Scott,  on  the  other  hand,  was  ready  to  use  popular  judgment 
as  an  important  test  of  his  opinions.  Coleridge  himself  pointed 
out  another  interesting  contrast.  He  wrote :  "  Dear  Sir  Wal- 
ter Scott  and  myself  were  exact,  but  harmonious  opposites  in 
this; — that  every  old  ruin,  hill,  river,  or  tree,  called  up  in  his 
mind  a  host  of  historical  or  biographical  associations,  .  .  . 
whereas,  for  myself,  notwithstanding  Dr.  Johnson,  I  believe  I 
should  walk  over  the  plain  of  Marathon  without  taking  more 
interest  in  it  than  in  any  other  plain  of  similar  features."2  We 
might  perhaps  say  that  Coleridge's  affection  was  given  to  ideas, 
Scott's,  to  objects ;  hence  Coleridge  was  a  critic  of  literary  prin- 
ciples and  theories,  Scott  a  critic  of  individual  books  and  writ- 
ers. It  follows  that  Scott  was  on  the  whole  an  impressionistic 
critic.  A  study  of  his  personality  is  essential  to  a  considera- 
tion of  his  critical  work,  for  he  was  not  so  much  a  systematic 
student  of  literature,  guided  by  fixed  principles,  as  a  man  of 
a  certain  temperament  who  read  particular  things  and  made 
particular  remarks  about  them  as  he  felt  inclined.  The  incon- 
sistencies and  contradictions  which  would  naturally  result  from 
such  a  procedure  are  occasionally  noticeable,  but  they  are  fewer 
than  would  occur  in  the  work  of  a  less  well-balanced  man  than 
himself. 

His  ideas  about  criticism  were  influenced  by  his  feeling  that 
the  judgment  of  the  public  would  after  all  take  its  own  course, 

1  Wylie,  Studies  in  Criticism,  pp.   107-8. 

2  Table  Talk,  August  4,  1833.     Works,  Vol.  VI,  p.  472. 


138  SCOTT   AS   A   CRITIC   OF   LITERATURE 

and  that  it  was  in  the  long  run  the  best  criterion.  He  used  his 
opinion  that  an  author,  even  in  his  own  life-time,  commonly 
receives  fair  treatment  from  the  public,  as  an  argument  against 
establishing  in  England  any  literary  body  having  the  power  of 
pensioning  literary  men.1  On  this  subject  he  said,  "  There 
is  .  .  .  really  no  occasion  for  encouraging  by  a  society  the 
competition  of  authors.  The  land  is  before  them,  and  if  they 
really  have  merit  they  seldom  fail  to  conquer  their  share  of 
public  applause  and  private  profit.  ...  I  cannot,  in  my  knowl- 
edge of  letters,  recollect  more  than  two  men  whose  merit  is 
undeniable  while,  I  am  afraid,  their  circumstances  are  narrow. 
I  mean  Coleridge  and  Maturin." 

Scott's  whole  attitude  toward  criticism  shows  that  he  felt 
its  supreme  function  to  be  elucidation.  It  should  also,  he  be- 
lieved, warn  the  world  against  books  that  were  foolish,  or 
pernicious,  intellectually  or  morally;  but  unless  there  were 
good  reason  for  issuing  such  warnings  the  bad  books  should 
be  ignored  and  the  good  treated  sympathetically,  not  without 
such  discrimination  as  should  distinguish  between  the  better 
and  the  worse  in  them,  but  with  emphasis  on  the  better.  His 
literary  creed,  though  not  formulated  into  a  system,  was  con- 
scious and  fairly  definite ;  but  it  consisted  of  general  principles 
which  never  resolved  themselves  into  intricate  subtleties  requir- 
ing great  space  for  their  development.  Scott  could  not  think 
in  that  way,  and  he  felt  convinced  that  such  thinking  was  use- 
less and  worse  than  useless.  A  magazine-writer  of  his  own 
period  who  said  of  him, — "  The  author  of  Waverlcy,  we  appre- 
hend, has  neither  the  patience  nor  the  disposition  requisite  for 
writing  philosophically  upon  any  subject,"2  was  mistaken,  for 
much  of  Scott's  criticism,  without  making  any  pretensions,  is 
really  philosophical.  But  any  fine-drawn  analysis  seemed  to 
him  to  serve  the  vanity  of  the  critic  rather  than  the  need  of 
the  public ;  and  he  despised  that  arrogance  in  the  critic  which 
leads  him  to  assume  to  direct  literary  taste. 

Historical  illustration  was  that  kind  of  editorial  work  which 
he  found  most  congenial,  and  which  harmonized  best  with  his 

1  Familiar  Letters,  Vol.  II,  p.  402. 

2  Article  on  Scott's  Demonology  and  Witchcraft,  Fraser's,  December, 
1830. 


HIS    POSITION    AS    CRITIC  139 

critical  principles;  for  when  he  could  bring  definite  facts  to  the 
service  of  elucidation  he  felt  that  he  was  doing  something 
worth  while.  Among  all  the  introductions  and  annotations 
that  we  have  from  his  hand,  including  those  of  the  Dryden  and 
the  Swift,  this  kind  of  explanation  greatly  predominates  over 
the  more  strictly  literary  comment;  in  his  reviews,  also,  it  is 
evident  that  he  seized  every  opportunity  for  turning  from  lit- 
erary to  historical  discussion.  He  was  in  the  habit  of  "  em- 
broidering the  subject,  whatever  it  might  he,  with  lively  anec- 
dotic illustration,"1  as  one  of  his  biographers  says.  We  are 
not  to  conclude  that  in  writing  on  specifically  literary  subjects 
he  felt  ill  at  ease.  He  felt,  on  the  contrary,  that  the  objection 
lay  in  the  too  great  ease  with  which  the  critic  might  become 
dictatorial.  He  was  fond  enough  of  details  when  they  were 
concrete  and  vital.  The  facts  of  literary  history  were  in  this 
category  to  him,  as  distinguished  from  the  notions  of  literary 
theory ;  and  we  find  that  his  critical  principles  are  apt  to  appear 
incidentally  among  remarks  on  what  seemed  to  him  the  more 
tangible  and  important  facts  of  literary  and  social  history. 
The  books  he  chose  to  review  were  chiefly  those  which  gave 
him  a  chance  to  use  his  historical  information  and  imagination. 
His  ideas  were  concrete,  as  those  of  a  great  novelist  must  in- 
evitably be.  Indeed  the  dividing  line  between  creative  work 
and  criticism  seems  often  to  be  obliterated  in  Scott's  literary 
discussions,  since  he  was  inclined  to  amplify  and  illustrate  in- 
stead of  dissecting  the  book  under  consideration.  As  a  critic 
he  was  distinguished  by  the  qualities  wrhich  appear  in  his  nov- 
els, and  which  may  be  described  in  Hazlitt's  words,  as  "  the 
most  amazing  retentiveness  of  memory,  and  vividness  of  con- 
ception of  what  would  happen,  be  seen,  and  felt  by  everybody 
in  given  circumstances."2 

Scott  felt  that  there  was  especial  danger  of  futile  theorizing 
in  the  criticism  of  poetry.  In  writing  about  Alexander's  Feast 
he  discussed  for  a  moment  the  possibility  of  detecting  points 
at  which  the  author  had  paused  in  his  work,  but  almost  imme- 
diately he   stopped  himself  with   the   characteristic  remark — 

'Mackenzie's  Life  of  Scott,  p.  118. 

-The  Plain  Speaker,  Hazlitt's  Works,  Vol.  VII,  p.  345. 


140  SCOTT   AS    A    CRITIC    OF   LITERATURE 

"  There  may  be  something  fanciful  ...  in  this  reasoning, 
which  I  therefore  abandon  to  the  reader's  mercy ;  only  begging 
him  to  observe,  that  we  have  no  mode  of  estimating  the  exer- 
tions of  a  quality  so  capricious  as  a  poetic  imagination."1  Early 
in  his  career  he  gave  this  rather  over-amiable  explanation  of 
the  fact  that  he  had  never  undertaken  to  review  poetry :  "  I 
am  sensible  there  is  a  greater  difference  of  tastes  in  that  depart- 
ment than  in  any  other,  and  that  there  is  much  excellent  poetry 
which  I  am  not  nowadays  able  to  read  without  falling  asleep, 
and  which  would  nevertheless  have  given  me  great  pleasure  at 
an  earlier  period  of  my  life.  Now  I  think  there  is  something 
hard  in  blaming  the  poor  cook  for  the  fault  of  our  own  palate 
or  deficiency  of  appetite."2  We  have  seen  that  he  did  review 
poetry  afterwards,  but  that  he  was  inclined  to  do  it  with  the 
least  possible  emphasis  on  the  specifically  sesthetic  elements. 
On  the  subject  of  novel-writing  he  developed  a  somewhat 
fuller  critical  theory,  but  here  also  his  discussions  concerned 
themselves  rather  with  the  kind  of  ideas  set  forth  than  with 
the  manner  of  presentation. 

It  does  indeed  seem  as  if  Scott's  feelings  were  more  easily 
aroused  to  the  point  of  formulating  "  laws  "  in  the  field  of 
political  criticism^  than  in  that  which  appears  to  us  his  more 
legitimate  sphere.  He  has  his  fling,  to  be  sure,  at  Madame  de 
Stael,  because  she  "  lived  and  died  in  the  belief  that  revolutions 
were  to  be  effected,  and  countries  governed,  by  a  proper  suc- 
cession of  clever  pamphlets."3  But  in  proposing  the  establish- 
ment of  the  Quarterly  Review  he  made  no  secret  of  the  fact 
that  his  motives  were  political.  The  literary  aspect  of  the 
periodical  was  thought  of  as  a  subordinate,  though  a  necessary 
and  not  unimportant  phase  of  the  undertaking.  The  Letters 
of  Malachi  Malagrozvther  contain  some  very  definite  maxims 
on  the  subject  of  political  economy,  and  just  as  decided  are  the 
remarks  made  in  the  last  of  Paul's  Letters,  as  well  as  in  the 
Life  of  Napoleon  and  elsewhere,  as  to  how  Louis  XVIII.  ought 
to  set  about  the  task  of  calming  his  distracted  kingdom  of 

1  Dry den,  Vol.  I,  p.  342.     See  above,  pp.  136-7. 

2  Familiar  Letters,  Vol.  I,  p.  84. 

3  Life  of  Bage,  in  Novelists'  Library. 


HIS   POSITION    AS    CRITIC  141 

France.  But  however  emphatic  Scott  may  be  in  the  comments 
on  government  which  appear  throughout  his  writings,  he  was 
as  strongly  averse  in  this  matter  as  in  literary  affairs  to  any 
separation  of  philosophy  from  fact :  his  maxims  arc  always 
derived  from  experience.  The  following  statement  of  opinion 
is  typical :  "In  legislating  for  an  ancient  people,  the  question 
is  not,  what  is  the  best  possible  system  of  law,  but  what  is  the 
best  they  can  bear.  Their  habitudes  and  prejudices  must  al- 
ways be  respected;  and,  whenever  it  is  practicable,  those  preju- 
dices, instead  of  being  destroyed,  ought  to  be  taken  as  the  basis 
of  the  new  regulations."1 

It  was  Scott's  political  creed  that  roused  the  ire  of  such  men 
as  Hazlitt  and  Hunt,  though  they  may  also  have  been  exas- 
perated at  the  unprecedented  success  of  poetry  which  seemed 
so  facile  and  so  superficial  to  them  as  Scott's.  Leigh  Hunt 
calls  him  "  a  poet  of  a  purely  conventional  order,"  "  a  bitter 
and  not  very  large-minded  politician,"  "  a  critic  more  agree- 
able than  subtle."2  But  Scott's  politics  may  be  looked  at  in 
another  way.  "  In  his  patriotism,"  says  Mr.  Courthope,  "  his 
passionate  love  of  the  past,  and  his  reverence  for  established 
authority,  literary  or  political,  Scott  is  the  best  representative 
among  English  men  of  letters  of  Conservatism  in  its  most 
generous  form."3 

Though  it  seems  to  have  been  a  common  opinion  among  the 
literary  men  of  his  own  time  that  Scott's  criticism  was  super- 
ficial, his  knowledge  of  mediaeval  literature  was,  as  we  have 
seen,  recognized  and  respected.  Favorable  comments  by  his 
contemporaries  on  other  parts  of  his  critical  work  are  not  dif- 
ficult to  find.     For  example,  Gifford  wrote  to  Murray  in  re- 

1  Essay  on  Judicial  Reform,  Edinburgh  Annual  Register,  Vol.  I,  pt.  2,  p. 
352.  Everyone  knows  that  Scott  was  a  decided  Tory,  and  it  is  commonly 
supposed  that  he  was  an  extremely  prejudiced  partisan.  But  he  closes  a 
political  passage  in  Woodstock  with  these  words :  "  We  hasten  to  quit  politi- 
cal reflections,  the  rather  that  ours,  we  believe,  will  please  neither  Whig  nor 
Tory."  (End  of  Chapter  11.)  From  the  definitions  of  Whig  and  Tory 
given  in  the  Tales  of  a  Grandfather,  no  one  could  guess  his  politics. 
(Chapter  53.) 

2  Leigh  Hunt's  Autobiography,  Vol.  I,  p.  263.  See  also  pp.  258-260,  and 
the  notes  on  his  Feast  of  the  Poets. 

3  Courthopc's  Liberal  Movement,  p.    122. 


142  SCOTT  AS  A  CRITIC  OF  LITERATURE 

gard  to  the  article  on  Lady  Suffolk's  Correspondence:  "  Scott's 
paper  is  a  clever,  sensible  thing — the  work  of  a  man  who 
knows  what  he  is  about."  1  Isaac  D'Israeli  made  the  following 
observation  on  another  of  Scott's  papers :  "  The  article  on 
Pepys,  after  so  many  have  been  written,  is  the  only  one  which, 
in  the  most  charming  manner  possible,  shows  the  real  value  of 
these  works,  which  I  can  assure  you  many  good  scholars  have 
no  idea  of."  A  more  recent  verdict  may  be  set  beside  those 
just  quoted,  and  it  is  in  perfect  agreement  with  them.  "  His 
critical  faculty,"  says  Professor  Saintsbury,  "  if  not  extraordi- 
narily subtle,  was  always  as  sound  and  shrewd  as  it  was  good- 
natured." 

Scott's  influence  as  a  critic  was  not  very  great,  but  his  crea- 
tive work  exerted  a  strong  influence  on  criticism  as  well  as  on 
the  whole  intellectual  life  of  his  age.  His  own  novels  demanded 
of  the  critic  that  kind  of  appreciation  of  the  large  qualities  and 
negligence  of  the  small  which  he  had  insisted  on  considering 
the  function  of  criticism ;  and  they  became  a  fact  in  literature 
which  determined  to  some  degree  the  attitude  taken  toward 
ephemeral  ideas.  Newman  notes  the  popularity  of  Scott's 
novels  as  one  of  the  influences  which  prepared  the  ground  for 
the  Tractarian  movement,  for  Scott  enriched  the  visions  of 
men  by  his  pictures  of  the  past,  gave  them  noble  ideas,  and 
created  a  desire  for  a  greater  richness  of  spiritual  life.4  Much 
of  his  criticism  also  was  inspired  by  the  wish  to  construct  an 
adequate  picture  of  the  past;  so  far  it  worked  in  the  same 
direction  with  the  novels.  Its  most  important  offices  aside  from 
this  were  perhaps  to  present  large  and  kindly  views  of  literature 
and  literary  characters,  especially  through  biographical  essays ; 
and  to  ameliorate  somewhat  the  prevailing  asperity  of  periodical 
criticism. 

1Life  of  Murray,  Vol.  II,  p.  159.  2Ibid.,  Vol.  II,  p.  232. 

3  Macmillan's  Magazine,  lxx:  326. 

*  Newman's  Apologia,  pp.  96-97.  Mark  Twain  thinks  the  influence  of 
the  novels  was  pernicious.  He  says :  "  A  curious  exemplification  of  the 
power  of  a  single  book  for  good  or  harm  is  shown  in  the  effects  wrought 
by  Don  Quixote  and  those  wrought  by  Ivanhoe.  The  first  swept  the  world's 
admiration  for  the  mediaeval  chivalry-silliness  out  of  existence ;  and  the 
other  restored  it.  .  .  .  Sir  Walter  had  so  large  a  hand  in  making  Southern 
character,  as  it  existed  before  the  war,  that  he  is  in  great  measure  respon- 
sible for  the  war."     {Life  on  the  Mississippi,  ch.  xlvi.) 


HIS    POSITION    AS    CRITIC  14^ 

A  man  of  Scott's  temperament  was  little  likely  to  set  himself 
up  for  a  prophet,  and  probably  no  literary  prophecies  of  his 
were  in  the  least  influential.  Though  he  sometimes  boasted 
that  he  understood  the  varying-  currents  of  popular  taste,  his 
experience  in  the  publishing  business  taught  him  the  fallibility 
of  his  impressions  when  the  work  of  writers  other  than  himself 
was  concerned.  He  once  wrote, — "  The  friends  who  know  me 
best,  and  to  whose  judgment  I  am  myself  in  the  constant  habit 
of  trusting,  reckon  me  a  very  capricious  and  uncertain  judge 
of  poetry ;  and  I  have  had  repeated  occasion  to  observe  that  I 
have  often  failed  in  anticipating  the  reception  of  poetry  from 
the  public."1  But  it  is  beyond  the  strength  of  flesh  and  blood 
to  resist  saying  things  about  the  future  sometimes,  and  Scott 
occasionally  yielded  to  the  temptation,  helped,  no  doubt,  by  his 
amiability.  Southey's  Madoc,  however,  has  not  yet  assumed 
that  place  at  the  feet  of  Milton  which,  as  we  have  seen,  he 
ventured  to  predict  for  it.  Yet,  if  we  may  trust  the  memory 
of  one  of  his  friends,  Scott  foresaw  the  literary  success  of  two 
of  his  greatest  contemporaries.  R.  P.  Gillies  said  in  his  Rec- 
ollections: "  I  remember  well  how  correct  Scott's  impressions 
were  of  such  beginners  in  the  literary  world  as  had  not  then 
acquired  any  fixed  character.  Of  Lord  Byron  he  had  from  the 
first  a  favourable  impression.  ...  Of  Wordsworth  he  always 
spoke  favourably,  insisting  that  he  was  a  true  poet,  but  pre- 
dicting that  it  would  be  long  ere  his  works  obtained  the  praise 
which  they  merited  from  the  public."2  Scott  explicitly  prided 
himself  on  two  of  his  prophecies :  that  Washington  Irving  would 
make  a  name  for  himself,  and  that  Sir  Arthur  Wellesley  would 
become  known  as  an  extraordinary  man. 

Though  Scott's  critical  work  is  comparatively  little  known, 
and  though  it  presents  no  solidly  organized  front  by  which  the 
public  may  be  impressed,  the  opinions  of  so  notable  a  writer 
have  always  had  a  certain  weight.  Mr.  Churton  Collins  thinks 
Scott's  judgment  on  Dunbar  has  led  modern  editors  to  indulge 

1  Familiar  Letters,  Vol.  I,  pp.  216-17.  See  also  his  remarks  upon  book- 
sellers in  his  review  of  Pitcairn's  Ancient  Criminal  Trials,  Quarterly, 
February,  1831. 

2  Fraser's,  xiii :  693. 


144:  SCOTT   AS   A   CRITIC    OF   LITERATURE 

in  very  exaggerated  statements  concerning  the  merit  of  that 
poet.1  A  heavier  charge  has  been  laid  at  Scott's  door  on  the 
score  of  his  edition  of  the  Memoirs  of  Captain  Carleton.  He 
concluded  on  very  insufficient  evidence,  says  Colonel  Parnell, 
that  these  memoirs  were  genuinely  historical,  published  them 
as  such,  and  by  the  weight  of  his  opinion  falsified  "  the  whole 
stream  of  nineteenth-century  history  bearing  on  the  reign  of 
Queen  Anne."2  Stanhope,  Macaulay,  and  other  historians 
were  ready  to  accept  Scott's  judgment  without  further  inves- 
tigation, it  seems ;  and  if  the  accusation  be  true  we  may  con- 
clude that  his  influence  as  a  critic  has  reached  farther  than 
might  at  first  sight  appear.  Yet  we  may  be  content  to  follow 
his  lead  in  general,  except  in  those  bits  of  enthusiasm  over  his 
friends  which  bear  witness  to  a  generously  optimistic  nature 
rather  than  to  a  rigid  critical  attitude  such  as  we  should  hardly 
demand  in  any  case  from  a  man  of  letters  commenting  on  his 
contemporaries  and  friends.  George  Ticknor  was  greatly  im- 
pressed by  the  "  right-mindedness  "  of  the  young  Sophia  Scott,3 
and  we  may  fairly  adopt  the  word  to  describe  the  father  whom 
she  so  much  resembled.  There  was  in  him,  as  Carlyle  said, 
"  such  a  sunny  current  of  true  humour  and  humanity,  a  free 
joyful  sympathy  with  so  many  things ;  what  of  fire  he  had  all 
lying  so  beautifully  latent,  as  radical  latent  heat,  as  fruitful 
internal  warmth  of  life ; — a  most  robust,  healthy  man  !"4 

Writers  upon  Scott  have  made  much,  perhaps  too  much,  of 
his  feeling  that  his  position  as  a  landed  gentleman  was  more 
enviable  than  his  prominence  as  a  writer.  The  point  would  be 
of  greater  consequence  if  it  performed  so  important  a  function 
in  explaining  his  work  as  has  commonly  been  assigned  to  it. 
We  are  told  that  he  wrote  much  and  hastily  because  he  wanted 
money  to  establish  and  support  an  estate ;  but  the  truth  is  that 
if  he  wrote  at  all  he  had  to  write  in  this  way.  He  justly  be- 
lieved that  he  could  do  his  best  work  so.  Yet  it  was  a  natural 
result  of  his  facility  that  he  should  look  upon  the  literature  he 

1  Essay  on  Dunbar  in  Ephemera  Critica. 

2  English  Historical  Review,  vi :  97. 

3  Life,  Letters  and  Journals  of  George  Ticknor,  Vol.  I,  p.  283. 

4  Carlyle's  Essay  on  Scott. 


IMS    POSITION    AS    CRITIC  L45 

produced  as  of  comparatively  Little  moment.  Some  of  his  re- 
marks about  his  critical  work,  however,  show  that  he  really 
regarded  creative  writing  as  the  business  of  his  life,  and  that 
in  contrast  with  it  he  considered  his  criticism  a  relief  from  more 
arduous  labor.  After  the  publication  of  Marmion  he  wrote: 
"  I  have  done  with  poetry  for  some  time — it  is  a  scourging 
crop,  and  ought  not  to  be  hastily  repeated.  Editing,  therefore, 
may  be  considered  as  a  green  crop  of  turnips  or  peas,  ex- 
tremely useful  for  those  whose  circumstances  do  not  admit  of 
giving  their  farm  a  summer  fallow."1  After  years  of  novel- 
writing  he  said  of  writing  a  review,  "  No  one  that  has  not 
laboured  as  I  have  done  on  imaginary  topics  can  judge  of  the 
comfort  afforded  by  walking  on  all-fours,  and  being  grave 
and  dull."2 

From  what  Scott  said  about  Dryden  as  a  critic  we  may  con- 
clude that  the  unsystematic  character  of  his  own  scholarly 
work  may  have  been  a  matter  of  principle  as  well  as  inclina- 
tion. "  Dryden,"  he  wrote,  "  forebore,  from  prudence,  indo- 
lence, or  a  regard  for  the  freedom  of  Parnassus,  to  erect  him- 
self into  a  legislator."3  The  words  remind  us  of  comments 
made  upon  Scott's  own  work,  as  for  example  by  Professor 
Masson,  who  spoke  of  "  the  shrewdness  and  sagacity  of  some 
of  his  critical  prefaces  to  his  novels,  where  he  discusses  prin- 
ciples of  literature  without  seeming  to  call  them  such."4  Scott 
was  quick  to  notice  "  cant  and  slang  "5  in  the  professional 
language  of  men  in  all  arts ;  and  he  valued  most  highly  the 
remarks  of  those  whose  intelligence  had  not  been  overlaid  by  a 
conventional  pedantry. 

Knowing  that  criticism  was  not  the  main  business  of  his 
life,  we  are  inclined  to  be  surprised  at  the  broad  fields  which 
he  seemed  to  have  no  hesitation  in  entering  upon.  His  remark- 
able memory  doubtless  had  something  to  do  with  this,  but  he 
lived  in  a  period  when  generalization  was  more  possible  and 
more  permissible  than  it  is  in  this  era  of  special  monographs. 

1  Lockhart,  Vol.  II,  p.  9. 

2  Journal,  Vol.  II.  p.  259:  Lockhart,  Vol.  V,  p.  248. 

3  Dryden,  Vol.  I,  conclusion. 

4 British  Novelists  and  their  Styles,  p.  204. 
'"Journal,  Vol.  II,  p.  173;  Lockhart,  Vol.  V,  p.  99. 

10 


146  SCOTT   AS    A   CRITIC   OF   LITERATURE 

The  large  tendencies  and  characteristics  that  he  traced  in  his 
essay  on  Romance,  for  instance,  are  undoubtedly  to  be  qualified 
at  numberless  points,  but  writing  when  he  did,  Scott  was  com- 
paratively untroubled  by  these  limitations.  Moreover,  he  had 
the  gift  of  seeing  things  broadly,  so  that  in  essentials  his  sur- 
vey remains  true.  But  the  amount  of  his  work  is  almost  as 
astonishing  as  its  scope  and  variety.  He  could  accomplish  so 
much  only  by  disregarding  details  of  form ;  and  that  he  did  so 
we  know  from  our  study  of  his  principles  of  composition,  con- 
firmed by  the  evidence  of  the  passages  from  him  that  have  here 
been  quoted.  It  is  clear,  also,  that  he  was  not  limited  by  that 
"  horror  of  the  obvious,"  which,  as  Mr.  Saintsbury  says,  "  bad 
taste  at  all  times  has  taken  for  a  virtue."1  Beyond  this  we 
have  to  fall  back  for  explanation  on  the  unusual  qualities  of 
his  mind.  An  observing  friend  said  of  him  that,  "  With  a 
degree  of  patience  and  quietude  which  are  seldom  combined 
with  much  energy,  he  could  get  through  an  incredible  extent 
of  literary  labour."2 

Every  quality  which  made  Scott  a  great  man  contributes  to 
the  interest  and  importance  of  his  criticism.  Such  a  body  of 
criticism,  formulated  by  a  large  creative  genius,  would  be  of 
special  consequence  if  it  served  merely  as  the  basis  for  a  study 
of  his  other  work,  a  commentary  on  the  principles  which  un- 
derlay his  whole  literary  achievement.  But  it  would  be  strange 
if  a  man  of  Scott's  intellectual  personality  could  write  criticism 
which  was  not  important  in  itself,  and  we  can  only  account 
for  the  general  neglect  of  this  part  of  his  work  by  considering 
how  large  a  place  his  poems  and  novels  give  him  in  the  history 
of  our  literature.  If  he  deserves  a  still  larger  place,  we  may 
remember  with  satisfaction  that  as  a  man  he  was  great  enough 
to  support  honorably  any  distinction  won  by  his  mind. 

1  History  of  Criticism,  Vol.  I,  p.  156. 

2  Recollections  of  Scott  by  R.  P.  Gillies,  Fraser's,  xii :  688. 


APPENDIX  I. 

Bibliography 

The  bibliography  of  Scott's  writings  is  given  in  three  parts, 
as  follows : 

i.  Books  which  Scott  wrote  or  edited,  or  to  which  he  was  an 
important  contributor.    The  list  is  chronological. 

2.  Contributions  to  periodicals. 

3.  Books   which   contain  letters   written  by   Scott.     These 

titles  are  arranged  approximately  in  the  order  of  their 
importance  from  the  point  of  view  of  a  study  of  Scott. 

1.  Books  which  Scott  ivrotc  or  edited,  or  to  which  lie  zvas 
an  important  contributor. 

(In  the  following  list  the  first  editions  of  the  poems  and  novels 
are  noted  without  bibliographical  details.  In  the  case  of  other 
works  the  main  facts  in  regard  to  publication  are  given ;  and  an 
attempt  is  made  to  indicate  the  nature  of  the  books  named,  unless 
they  have  been  discussed  in  the  text.) 

1796  The  Chase  and  William  and  Helen.  (Translated  from 
Burger.) 

1799  Goetz  of  Berlichingen.     (Translated  from  Goethe.) 
Apology  for  Tales  of  Terror. 

Twelve  copies  were  privately  printed,  to  exhibit  the  work  of 
the  Ballantyne  press  at  Kelso.  The  title  was  occasioned  by  the 
delay  in  the  publication  of  Matthew  Lewis's  Tales  of  Terror,  and 
the  little  book  contains  poems  which  Scott  had  contributed  to  that 
work.  (The  contents  are  named  in  the  Catalogue  of  the  Centenary 
Exhibtion.) 

1800  The  Eve  of  St.  John,  a  Border  ballad. 

1802-3  Minstrelsy  of  the  Scottish  Border;  consisting  of  his- 
torical and  romantic  ballads,  collected  in  the  southern 
counties  of  Scotland ;  with  a  few  of  modern  date 
founded  upon  local  tradition. 

3  vols.  Vols.  1  and  2,  Kelso,  1802;  vol.  3,  Edinburgh,  1803. 
Second     edition,     1803.     The     book     was     republished     frequently 

1-17 


148  SCOTT  AS  A  CRITIC  OF  LITERATURE 

before  1830,  when  it  was  included  in  the  collected  edition 
of  Scott's  poems.  It  has  also  been  reprinted  independently  since 
then  several  times.  The  latest  and  most  complete  edition  is  that 
published  in  1902,  edited  by  T.  F.  Henderson.  Other  books  in 
which  part  of  Scott's  ballad  material  was  used  in  such  a  way  as 
to  give  his  name  a  place  on  the  title-page  are  named  below : 

Kinmont  Willie :  a  Border  ballad,  with  an  historical  introduction, 
by  Sir  Walter  Scott.     (Carlisle  Tracts  No.  6)  Carlisle,  1841. 

A  Ballad  Book  by  C.  K.  Sharpe.  MDCCCXXIII.  Reprinted 
with  notes  and  ballads  from  the  unpublished  manuscripts  of  C.  K. 
Sharpe  and  Sir  Walter  Scott  .  .  .  edited  by  ...  D.  Laing.  Edin- 
burgh,   1880. 

1804  Sir  Tristrem :  a  metrical  romance  of  the  thirteenth  cen- 

tury, by  Thomas  of  Ercildoune,  called  the  Rhymer. 
Edited  from  the  Auchinleck  manuscript  by  Walter 
Scott.     Edinburgh. 

Only  12  copies  of  Sir  Tristrem  were  printed  in  the  form  in 
which  Scott  had  intended  to  publish  it,  without  the  expurgation 
which  his  friends  insisted  upon.  (Letters  to  R.  Polwhele,  etc., 
p.  18;  Lockhart,  I.  361).  The  following  book  contains  a  part  of 
the  same  material : 

A  Penni  worth  of  Witte,  Florice  and  Blancheflour,  and  other 
pieces  of  ancient  English  poetry,  selected  from  the  Auchinleck 
manuscript.  (With  an  account  of  the  Auchinleck  manuscript  by 
Sir  Walter  Scott)  Edinburgh,  1857.  Printed  for  the  Abbotsford 
Club. 

1805  The  Lay  of  the  Last  Minstrel. 

1806  Original  Memoirs  written  during  the  great  civil  war; 

being  the  life  of  Sir  H.  Slingsby,  and  memoirs 
of  Capt.  Hodgson.  With  notes,  etc.  Edinburgh. 
[Edited  by  Scott  anonymously.] 

Ballads  and  Lyrical  Pieces.     [Poems  which  had  already 
appeared  in  various  collections.] 
1808     Marmion. 

Memoirs  of  Captain  Carleton,  .  .  .  including  anecdotes 
of  the  war  in  Spain  under  the  Earl  of  Peterborough, 
.  .  .  written  by  himself.  Edinburgh.  (8vo,  but  25 
copies  were  printed  on  large  paper.)  [Edited  by 
Scott  anonymously.] 

Scott  was  probably  mistaken  in  considering  this  to  be  a  genuine 
autobiography.  (See  Col.  Parnell's  argument  in  The  English  His- 
torical Review,  vi :  97.)  It  has  been  attributed  to  Defoe,  and  Col. 
Parnell  attributes  it  to  Swift,  but  the  question  of  its  authorship  is 


BIBLIOGRAPHY  149 

still  unsolved.  The  book  was  first  published  in  1728,  but  Scott 
used  the  edition  of  1743,  which  he  was  so  inaccurate  as  to  take  for 
the  original  edition;  and  as  at  that  date  Defoe  had  long  been  dead 
and  Swift  had  lost  his  mind,  the  possibility  of  attributing  it  to 
either  of  them  naturally  would  not  occur  to  him.  Scott  wrote 
scarcely  any  notes,  but  his  short  introduction  contains  some  inter- 
esting general  reflections  which  are  quoted  by  Lockhart. 

The  Works  of  John  Dryden,  now  first  collected ;  illus- 
trated with  notes,  historical,  critical  and  explanatory, 
and  a  life  of  the  author,  by  Walter  Scott,  Esq.  18 
vols.     London. 

Second  edition,  18  vols.,  Edinburgh,  1821. 

Another  edition,  revised  and  corrected  by  George  Saintsbury, 
Edinburgh,  1882-1893. 

The  Life  of  John  Dryden  (4to,  only  50  copies  printed). 
Memoirs  of  John  Dryden,  Paris,  1826. 

Memoirs  of  Robert  Carey,  Earl  of  Monmouth,  written 
by  himself,  and  Fragmenta  Regalia,  being  a  history 
of  Queen  Elizabeth's  favourites,  by  Sir  Robert  Naun- 
ton.  With  explanatory  annotations.  Edinburgh. 
[Edited  by  Scott  anonymously.] 

Scott  contributed  no  introductions,  but  his  notes  are  copious, 
especially  with  regard  to  the  history  of  the  Border.  This  is  one 
of  the  books  of  which  Scott  is  reported  to  have  said  to  his  pub- 
lisher, Mr.  Constable,  "  Did  I  not  do  Hodgson,  Carey,  Carleton, 
etc.,  to  serve  you ;  and  did  I  ever  ask  or  receive  any  remuneration  ?" 
(Ballantync's  Refutation,  etc.,  p.  76.) 

Queenhoo-Hall,  a  romance;  and  Ancient  Times,  a 
drama.  By  the  late  Joseph  Strutt,  author  of  Rural 
Sports  and  Pastimes  of  the  People  of  England. 
[Edited  by  Scott,  who  wrote  a  conclusion  for  Queen- 
hoo-Hall. This  conclusion  is  given  in  an  appendix 
to  the  introduction  of  Waverley.]  Edinburgh. 
1809  The  State  Papers  and  Letters  of  Sir  Ralph  Sadler  .  .  . 
edited  by  Arthur  Clifford  ...  to  which  is  added  a 
memoir  of  the  life  of  Sir  Ralph  Sadler,  with  histori- 
cal notes,  by  Walter  Scott,  Esq.  2  vols.  Edinburgh. 
(Also  the  same  work  in  3  vols.,  with  same  date.) 

The  biography  is  included  in  all  the  editions  of  Scott's  Prose 
Works. 


150  SCOTT   AS   A   CRITIC    OF   LITERATURE 

The  Life  of  Edward  Lord  Herbert  of  Cherbury,  writ- 
ten by  himself.  With  a  prefatory  memoir.  Edin- 
burgh ;  printed  by  James  Ballantyne  &  Co.  for  John 
Ballantyne  &  Co.  and  John  Murray.  (A  reprint  of 
Walpole's  edition,  with  the  prefatory  memoir  added.) 

It  is  a  question  whether  Scott  edited  this  book,  but  it  has  been 
ascribed  to  him,  and  is  given  under  his  name  without  hesitation 
in  the  British  Museum  catalogue.  The  prefatory  memoir  is  short 
and  largely  made  up  of  quotations,  but  it  sounds  as  if  Scott  might 
have  written  it.  The  book  is  one  to  which  he  often  refers.  Mr. 
Sidney  Lee,  in  his  edition  of  the  Autobiography,  says  merely, 
"  Walpole's  edition  was  reprinted  in  1770,  1809,  and  in  1826."  Re- 
printed in  the  Universal  Library :  Biography,  vol.  I,  London,  1853. 

1809/-15  A  Collection  of  Scarce  and  Valuable  Tracts  on  the 
most  interesting  and  entertaining  subjects :  but  chiefly 
such  as  relate  to  the  history  and  constitution  of  these 
kingdoms.  Selected  from  an  infinite  number  in  print 
and  manuscript,  in  the  Royal,  Cotton,  Sion,  and  other 
public,  as  well  as  private,  libraries ;  particularly  that 
of  the  late  Lord  Somers.  The  second  edition,  re- 
vised, augmented,  and  arranged  by  Walter  Scott, 
Esq.     13  vols.     London. 

There  are  some  additions.  Scott  says  in  the  Advertisement: 
"  The  Memoirs  of  the  Wars  in  the  Low  Countries  by  the  gallant 
Williams,  and  the  very  singular  account  of  Ireland  by  Derrick, 
are  the  most  curious  of  those  now  published  for  the  first  time. 
.  .  .  The  introductory  remarks  and  notes  have  been  added  by  the 
present  Editor,  at  the  expense  of  some  time  and  labour.  It  is 
needless  to  observe,  that  both  have  been  expended  upon  a  humble 
and  unambitious,  though  not,  it  is  hoped,  an  useless  task.  The 
object  of  the  introductions  was  to  present  such  a  short  and  sum- 
mary view  of  the  circumstances  under  which  the  Historical  and 
Controversial  Tracts  were  respectively  written,  as  to  prevent  the 
necessity  of  referring  to  other  works.  Such  therefore,  as  refer 
to  events  of  universal  notoriety  are  but  slightly  and  generally 
mentioned;  such  as  concern  less  remarkable  points  of  history  are 
more  fully  explained.  The  Notes  are  in  general  illustrative  of 
obscure  passages,  or  brief  notices  of  authorities,  whether  cor- 
roborative or  contradictory  of  the  text."  The  following  book 
contains  a  part  of  the  same  material : 

The  Image  of  Irelande  with  a  Discoverie  of  Woodkarne.  By 
John  Derricke,  1581.  With  Notes  by  Sir  Walter  Scott.  Edited  by 
John  Small.     Edinburgh,  1883.     (See  Somers'  Tracts,  Vol.  I.) 


BIBLIOGRAPHY  151 

1810  English  Minstrelsy.  Being  a  selection  of  fugitive 
poetry  from  the  best  English  authors,  with  some  orig- 
inal pieces  hitherto  unpublished.     2  vols.     Edinburgh. 

The  Centenary  Catalogue  says  that  Scott  and  his  friend 
William  Erskine  edited  this  book  together.  In  the  Advertisement 
the  publishers  (John  Ballantyne  &  Co.)  say:  "To  one  eminent 
individual,  whose  name  they  do  not  venture  to  particularize,  they 
are  indebted  for  most  valuable  assistance  in  selection,  arrangement, 
and  contribution;  and  to  that  individual  they  take  this  oppor- 
tunity to  present  the  humble  tribute  of  their  thanks,  for  a  series 
of  kindnesses,  of  which  that  now  acknowledged  is  among  the 
least."  There  is  no  critical  apparatus.  The  book  contains  original 
poems  by  Scott,  Southey,  Rogers,  Joanna  Baillie,  and  others  not 
so  well  known. 

The  Lady  of  the  Lake. 

Memoirs  of  the  Duke  of  Sully.  Translated  from  the 
French  [by  Charlotte  Lennox]  ,  .  .  a  new  edition 
.  .  .  corrected,  with  additional  notes,  some  letters  of 
Henry  the  Great,  and  a  brief  historical  introduction 
embellished  with  portraits.     5  vols.     London. 

Another  edition,  4  vols.  London  1858,  has  these  words  on  the 
title-page :  "  A  new  edition,  revised  and  corrected ;  with  addi- 
tional notes,  and  an  historical  introduction,  attributed  to  Sir 
Walter  Scott."  I  have  found  no  external  evidence  that  Scott  was 
the  editor.  The  introduction  sounds  as  if  Scott  wrote  it,  but 
that  so  much  work  could  have  been  done  by  him  without  occasion- 
ing any  record  seems  unlikely.  There  is  a  historical  introduction 
of  35  PP-,  and  copious  notes.  The  book  is  one  with  which  Scott 
was  familiar.     See  Memoirs  of  Robert  Carey,  pp.  34  and  41. 

The  Poetical  Works  of  Anna  Seward,  with  extracts 
from  her  literary  correspondence.  Edited  by  Walter 
Scott,  Esq.     3  vols.     Edinburgh. 

The  biographical  preface  is  given  in  the  Miscellaneous  Prose 
Works.     The  notes  are  by  Miss  Seward. 

Ancient  British  Drama,  in  three  volumes.  London. 
(Printed  for  William  Miller,  by  James  Ballantyne  & 
Co.,  Edinburgh.) 

I  find  no  evidence  that  Scott  was  the  editor  of  this  book,  but 
it  is  sometimes  ascribed  to  him  in  library  catalogues.  It  con- 
tains merely  a  two-page  introduction  and  brief  notes,  and  a  col- 
lection of  plays.     (See  above,  p.  52,  note.) 


152  SCOTT   AS   A   CRITIC   OF   LITERATURE 

1811  The  Modern  British  Drama,  in  five  volumes.  London. 
(Printed  for  William  Miller,  by  James  Ballantyne  & 
Co.,  Edinburgh.) 

Vols.  I  and  II,  Tragedies,  with  introduction  in  vol.  I. 

Vols.  Ill  and  IV,  Comedies,  with  introduction  in  vol.  III. 

Vol.  V,   Operas  and  Farces,  with  introduction. 

These  volumes  apparently  belong  to  the  same  collection  as  the 
Ancient  British  Drama,  noted  above,  and  the  external  evidence 
for  Scott's  authorship  is  the  same.  But  the  introductions  are 
fuller,  and  they  sound  very  much  like  Scott.  (See  above,  p.  52, 
note.) 

The  Vision  of  Don  Roderick. 

Memoirs  of  the  Court  of  Charles  II,  by  Count  Gram- 

mont.     With    numerous    additions    and    illustrations. 

London.     [Edited  by  Scott] 

Reprinted  in  1846,  1853,  1864.  This  last  edition,  in  the  Bohn 
Library,  has  about  100  pp.  of  historical  notes. 

Secret  History  of  the  Court  of  James  the  First.  With 
notes  and  introductory  remarks.  2  vols.  Edinburgh. 
[Edited  by  Scott  anonymously.] 

The  book  contains  1.  Osborne's  Traditional  Memoirs;  2.  Sir 
Anthony  Welldon's  Court  and  Character  of  King  James ;  3.  Aulicus 
Coquinariae;  4.  Sir  Edward  Peyton's  Divine  Catastrophe  of  the 
House  of   Stuarts. 

181 3  Rokeby. 

Memoirs  of  the  Reign  of  King  Charles  I.,  by  Sir  Philip 
Warwick.  Edinburgh.  [Edited  by  Scott  anony- 
mously.] 

The  Bridal  of  Triermain. 

1814  Illustrations  of  Northern  Antiquities  from  the  earlier 

Teutonic  and  Scandinavian  romances,  by  Robert 
Jamieson  .  .  .  with  an  abstract  of  the  Eyrbyggja- 
Saga;  being  the  early  annals  of  that  district  of  Ice- 
land lying  around  the  promontory  called  Sudefells, 
by  Walter  Scott.     Edinburgh. 

See  also  Northern  Antiquities  by  P.  H.  Mallet,  London,  1847; 
and  the  edition  in  Bohn's  Library,  1890. 

Lockhart  says :  "  Any  one  who  examines  the  share  of  the  work 
which  goes  under  Weber's  name  will  see  that  Scott  had  a  con- 
siderable hand  in  that  also.  The  rhymed  versions  from  the  Nibe- 
lungen  Lied  came,  I  can  have  no  doubt,  from  his  pen."  {Lockhart, 
II,  320.) 


BIBLIOGRAPHY  1">.'! 

The  Works  of  Jonathan  Swift,  containing  additional 
letters,  tracts,  and  poems,  not  hitherto  published;  with 
notes  and  a  life  of  the  author,  by  Walter  Scott.  19 
vols.     Edinburgh. 

Second  edition,  revised,   Edinburgh,   1824. 
Memoirs  of  Jonathan  Swift,  Paris,  1826. 

The  Letting  of  Humour's  Blood  in  the  Head  Vaine, 
etc.  By  Samuel  Rowlands.  Edinburgh.  [Edited 
by  Scott.  His  name  is  not  given,  but  the  Advertise- 
ment is  dated  at  Abbotsford.] 

This  is  an  exact  reproduction  of  the  161 1  edition,  except  for  the 
addition  of  a  few  pages  containing  the  Advertisement  and  the 
notes.     Another  edition  was  printed  in  1815. 

Waverley. 
1814-17  The  Border  Antiquities  of  England  and  Scotland; 
comprising  specimens  of  architecture  and  sculpture, 
and  other  vestiges  of  former  ages,  accompanied  by 
descriptions.  Together  with  illustrations  of  remark- 
able incidents  in  Border  history  and  tradition,  and 
original  poetry.  By  Walter  Scott,  Esq.  2  vols. 
4to.     London. 

Another  edition,  in  2  vols,  folio,  London,  1889. 

Lockhart  says  the  introduction  to  this  work  was  written  in 
1817,  but  this  is  a  mistake,  for  it  is  in  the  first  volume,  which  was 
published  in  1814. 

1815     The  Lord  of  the  Isles. 

Guy  Mannering. 

The  Field  of  Waterloo. 

The  Secret  Commonwealth  of  Elves,  Fauns,  and  Fairies, 

by  Robert  Kirk. 

The  attribution  of  this  to  Scott  rests  on  a  letter  by  George 
Ticknor,  in  Allibone's  Dictionary  (vol.  II,  p.  1967)  in  which  he  says: 
"  Kirk's  Secret  Commonwealth,  a  curious  tract,  of  about  a  hun- 
dred quarto  pages,  on  Fairy  Superstitions  and  second  sight,  origi- 
nally published  in  1691,  and  of  which,  in  1815,  Mr.  Scott  had 
caused  a  hundred  copies  to  be  privately  printed  by  the  Ballantynes, 
with  additions,  a  circumstance,  I  think,  not  noted  by  Lockhart." 
Mr.  Lang  thinks  the  book  was  never  printed  until  1815.  (See  his 
edition,  London,  1893).  This  1815  edition  of  100  copies  was  made, 
he  says,  from  a  manuscript  copy  preserved  in  the  Advocates' 
Library,  for  Longman  &  Co.  He  quotes  one  of  Scott's  references 
to  the  book,  but  does  not  intimate  that  Scott  was  the  editor. 


154  SCOTT   AS   A    CRITIC   OF   LITERATURE 

Memorie  of  the  Somervilles ;  being  a  history  of  the 
baronial  house  of  Somerville,  by  James,  eleventh  Lord 
Somerville.  2  vols.  Edinburgh.  [Edited  by  Scott 
anonymously.] 

The  additions  by  the  editor  consist  of  a  short  preface  and  abun- 
dant notes. 

1816  Paul's  Letters  to  his  Kinsfolk.     Edinburgh. 

These  letters  were  anonymous,  but  Scott  was  always  recognized 
as  the  author  of  them.  They  are  contained  in  the  Miscellaneous 
Prose  Works. 

The  Antiquary. 

Tales  of  my  Landlord.     First  series : 

The  Black  Dwarf. 

Old  Mortality. 

1817  Harold  the  Dauntless. 
Rob  Roy. 

1818  Tales  of  my  Landlord.     Second  series : 

The  Heart  of  Midlothian. 
Burt's  Letters  from  the  North  of  Scotland  .  .  .  the 
fifth  edition,  with  a  large  appendix,  containing  various 
important  historical  documents,  hitherto  unpublished ; 
with  an  introduction  and  notes,  by  the  editor,  R. 
Jamieson  .  .  .  and  the  history  of  Donald  the  Ham- 
merer, from  an  authentic  account  of  the  family  of 
Invernahyle  (by  Scott:  see  a  note  accompanying  the 
text).     2  vols.     London. 

Scott's  contribution  is  short.  See  also  Appendix  IV,  which  is 
taken  "  from  a  manuscript  in  the  possession  of  the  Gartmore 
Family,  communicated  by  Walter  Scott  Esq."  Scott's  name  had 
become  so  valuable  that  the  publishers  tried  to  put  it  on  the  title- 
page  of  this  book,  to  his  great  indignation.  (See  Constable,  III, 
119-20.) 

1818-24  The  Encyclopaedia  Britannica:  Supplement.  [For 
this  work  Scott  wrote  the  following  essays  :]  Chivalry, 
published  in  1818;  The  Drama,  published  in  1819;  Ro- 
mance, published  in  1824.  (These  are  given  in  the 
Miscellaneous  Prose  Works.) 


BIBLIOGRAPHY  I  ">:> 

1819  Talcs  of  my  Landlord.     Third  scries: 

The  Bride  of  Lammermoor. 

A  Legend  of  Montrose. 
The  Visionary,  by  Somnambulic.     (A  political  satire 

in    three    letters,    republished    from    the    Edinburgh 

Weekly  Journal.)     Edinburgh. 
Description  of  the  Regalia  of  Scotland.     Edinburgh. 

This  has  been   reprinted  many  times.     It   was   included  also   in 
Provincial  Antiquities. 

Ivanhoe. 
1819-26  The  Provincial  Antiquities  and  Picturesque  Scenery 
of  Scotland,  with  descriptive  illustrations  by  Sir 
Walter  Scott,  Bart.  [First  published  in  ten  parts 
between  1819  and  1826.]  2  vols.  London,  1826. 
4to. 

1820  The  Monastery. 
The  Abbot. 

Memorials   of  the   Haliburtons.     Edinburgh.     [Edited 
by  Scott  anonymously.] 


h 


30  copies  were  printed  in  1820,  and  30  more  in  1824. 

Reprinted,  London,  1877,  for  the  Royal  Historical  Society,  in 
Genealogical  Memoirs  of  the  Family  of  Sir  Walter  Scott,  Bart., 
of  Abbotsford,  by  the  Rev.  Charles  Rogers,  LL.D. 

Trivial  Poems  and  Triolets.  Written  in  obedience  to 
Mrs.  Tomkin's  commands.  By  Patrick  Carey.  Lon- 
don. [Edited  by  Scott.  His  name  is  not  given,  but 
the  introduction  is  dated  at  Abbotsford.] 

A  thin  4to,  with  a  short  introduction  and  a  few  notes.  A  part 
of  the  material  had  been  used  in  the  Edinburgh  Annual  Register 
for    1810. 

1 82 1  Northern  Memoirs,  calculated  for  the  meridian  of  Scot- 
land. To  which  is  added  the  contemplative  and  prac- 
tical angler.  Writ  in  the  year  1658.  By  Richard 
Franck.  A  new  edition,  with  preface  and  notes. 
Edinburgh.     [Edited  by  Scott.] 

Kenilworth. 

The  Pirate. 


156  SCOTT   AS   A   CRITIC    OF   LITERATURE 

1 82 1-4  The  Novelists'  Library.  Edited,  with  prefatory  me- 
moirs, by  Sir  Walter  Scott.     10  vols.     London. 

Also  Lives  of  the  Novelists,  2  vols.,  Paris,  1825.  A  recent  edition 
is  that  published,  with  an  introduction  by  Austin  Dobson,  by  the 
Oxford  University  Press  (No.  94  in  The  World's  Classics). 
When  these  Lives  were  issued  among  the  Miscellaneous  Prose 
Works  some  of  the  biographical  prefaces  were  put  with  them, 
and  also  biographical  notices,  reprinted  from  the  Edinburgh 
Weekly  Journal,  of  Charles  Duke  of  Buccleuch  and  Queensberry, 
John  Lord  Somerville,  King  George  III,  Lord  Byron,  and  The 
Duke  of  York.  I  give  below  the  names  of  certain  books  in  which 
Scott's  biographies  were  utilized,  but  the  list  is  probably  far  from 
complete : 

An  Account  of  the  death  and  funeral  procession  of  Frederick 
Duke  of  York,  etc.  To  which  is  subjoined  Sir  Walter  Scott's 
Character  of  His  Royal  Highness.  By  John  Sykes.  Newcastle, 
1827. 

The  Life  and  Opinions  of  Tristram  Shandy,  gentleman.  By 
Laurence  Sterne,  A.M.,  with  a  life  of  the  author,  by  Sir  Walter 
Scott.     Paris,    1832.     (Baudry's   Foreign   Library.) 

Beauties  of  Sterne,  with  some  account  of  his  writings  by  Sir 
Walter  Scott.     Amsterdam,    1836. 

Selecl    Works    of    Smollett.     Memoir   by    Sir   W.    Scott.     Phi^f-**    jflj 
delphia,   1849. 

The  Novels  and  Miscellaneous  Works  of  Daniel  De  Foe. 
a    biographical    memoir    of    the    author,    literary    prefaces    to 
various  pieces,  illustrative  notes,  etc.,  including  all  contained  ii 
edition  attributed  to  the  late  Sir  Walter  Scott,  with  consideraT. 
additions.     20  vols.,  London,  1840. 

The  Novels  and  Miscellaneous  Works  of  Daniel  de  Foe.  With 
prefaces  and  notes,  including  those  attributed  to  Sir  Walter  Scott. 
6  vols.,  London,   1854-6.     (Bohn's   British  Classics.) 

The  Rambler,  by  Samuel  Johnson  LL.D.,  with  a  sketch  of  the 
author's  life  by  Sir  Walter  Scott.     2  vols.,  London,  187? 

1822  Chronological  Notes  of  Scottish  Affairs,  from  1680  till 
1 701 ;  being  chiefly  taken  from  the  diary  of  Lord 
Fountainhall.     Edinburgh.     [Edited  by  Scott.] 

See  Historical  Notices  of  Scotish  Affairs,  selected  from  the 
manuscripts  of  Sir  John  Lauder  of  Fountainhall,  bart.  2  vols. 
Edinburgh,  1848,  printed  for  the  Bannatyne  club.  Here  Scott's 
edition  is  referred  to,  and  his  introduction  is  reprinted.  The 
book  was  re-edited  because  Scott  did  not  use  the  original  manu- 
script, but  an  interpolated  transcript,  and  he  had  no  means  for 
accurately  determining  the  original  text. 

Halidon  Hill,  a  dramatic  sketch. 

Macduff's  Cross   (in  Joanna  Baillie's  Poetical  Miscel- 
lanies). 


Phi^;^    Iff 
WijT 

erable 


r.ir.uoc.KAriiv  157 

Military   Memoirs  of  the  Great  Civil  War.      Being  the 
military  memoirs  of  John  Gwynne;  and  an  account 
of  the  Earl  of  Glcncairn's  expedition,  as  general  of 
His  Majesty's  forces,  in  the  highlands  of  Scotland,  in 
the  years  1653  and  1654,  by  a  person  who  was  eye 
and  ear  witness  to  every  transaction.  .  .  .  Edinburgh. 
[Edited  by  Scott.     His  name  is  not  given,  but  the 
introduction  is  dated  at  Abbotsford.] 
There  are  some  notes,  and  a  short  historical  introduction. 
•  Sketch  of  the  Life  and  Character  of  the  late  Lord  Kin- 
y     neder.     [Edited  by  Scott.     A  postscript  says:  "This 
,  notice  was  chiefly  drawn  up  by  the  late  Mr.   Hay 

Donaldson."]      Edinburgh. 
Only  a  few  copies  were  printed,  for  private  distribution. 

The  Fortunes  of  Nigel. 

1823  Peveril  of  the  Peak. 
Quentin  Durward. 
St.  Ronan's  Well. 

1824  Lays  ofthe  "Cindsays,  being  poems  by  the  ladies  of  the 
•    House  of  Balcarras.     Edinburgh.     [Edited  by  Scott, 

and  designed  as  a  contribution  to  the  Bannatyne  Club, 
but  suppressed  after  being  printed.] 
Redgauntlet. 

1825  Auld  Robin  Gray;  a  ballad.     By  the  Rt.  Honourable 

Lady  Anne  Barnard,  born  Lady  Anne  Lindsay,  of 
Balcarras.     [Edited  by  Scott  for  the  Bannatyne  Club.] 
Tales  of  the  Crusaders : 
The  Betrothed. 
The  Talisman. 

1826  Letters  of  Malachi  Malagrowther  on  the  Currency.      (To 

the  editor  of   the   Edinburgh   Weekly   Journal.)     3 
parts.     Edinburgh. 
Woodstock. 
1826?     Shakspeare  [edited  by  Scott  and  Lockhart?],  volumes 
II,  III,  and  IV,  without  title  page  and  date.    Printed 
by  James  Ballantyne  &  Co. 


158  SCOTT   AS    A    CRITIC    OF   LITERATURE 

Scott  and  Lockhart  began  in  1823  or  1824  to  prepare  an  edition 
of  Shakspere.  In  Jan.,  1825,  Constable  wrote  to  a  London  book- 
seller :  "  It  gives  me  great  pleasure  to  tell  you  that  the  first  sheet 
of  Sir  Walter  Scott's  Shakspeare  is  now  in  type  .  .  .  This  I  ex- 
pect will  be  a  first-rate  property."  (Constable's  Correspondence, 
II,  344.)  At  the  time  of  Constable's  bankruptcy  in  1826  there  was 
a  disagreement  in  regard  to  the  ownership  of  the  property.  Scott 
wrote  to  Lockhart,  May  30,  1826,  "  What  do  you  about  Shak- 
speare? Constable's  creditors  seem  desirous  to  carry  it  on.  Cer- 
tainly their  bankruptcy  breaks  the  contract.  For  me  e'est  egal:  I 
have  nothing  to  do  with  the  emoluments,  and  I  can  with  very 
little  difficulty  discharge  my  part  of  the  matter,  which  is  the 
Prolegomena,  and  Life  and  Times."  (Lang's  Lockhart,  I,  409.) 
In  1827  the  question  of  carrying  on  the  work  was  still  undecided, 
and  it  was  also  mentioned  in  a  letter  in  1830.  (Lang's  Lockhart 
II,  13  and  59).  The  project  was  ultimately  abandoned,  and  the 
fate  of  that  part  of  the  work  which  was  actually  in  print  is  un- 
known. In  the  Barton  Collection  in  the  Boston  Public  Library 
is  preserved  what  is  perhaps  a  unique  copy  of  three  volumes  of 
the  set  of  ten  that  Scott  and  Lockhart  undertook  to  prepare.  But 
as  the  books  are  bound  up  without  title-pages,  and  as  the  com- 
mentary contains  nothing  that  would  determine  its  authorship, 
the  attribution  is  probable  rather  than  certain.  These  volumes 
include  twelve  of  the  comedies.  On  the  fly-leaf  of  one  of  them 
is  a  note  written  by  Mr.  Rodd,  a  London  bookseller.  He  says : 
"  I  purchased  these  three  volumes  from  a  sale  at  Edinburgh. 
They  were  entered  in  the  catalogue  as  '  Shakespeare's  Works, 
edited  by  Sir  Walter  Scott  and  Lockhart,  vols,  ii,  iii,  iv,  all  pub- 
lished, unique '."  It  was  not  positively  known  that  such  a  work 
had  been  planned  until  the  publication  of  Constable's  Correspon- 
dence in  1874.  At  that  time  Justin  Winsor  wrote  a  letter  to  the 
Boston  Advertiser  (March  21,  1874)  in  which  he  said:  "The 
account  of  the  Barton  collection,  which  was  printed  fifteen  years 
ago,  contained  the  earliest  public  mention,  I  believe,  of  the  suppo- 
sition that  Scott  ever  engaged  in  such  a  work,  which  this  life  of 
Constable  now  renders  certain.  These  later  corroborative  state- 
ments give  a  peculiar  interest  to  the  volumes  which  are  now  in 
this  library  and  which  are  perhaps  the  only  ones  of  the  edition 
now  in  existence."  The  introductions  to  the  plays  are  each  only 
a  page  or  two  long,  and  are  mainly,  like  the  notes,  compilations. 
The  book  corresponds  fairly  well  with  the  description  given  in 
Constable.  (See  Vol.  Ill,  pp.  183,  193,  237-8,  241,  242,  244,  246, 
305,  321,  442.  See  also  Lang's  Lockhart,  I,  308-9,  395-6,  and 
Lang's  Introduction  to  Peveril  of  the  Peak. 

1827  The  Life  of  Napoleon  Buonaparte,  Emperor  of  the 
French.  With  a  preliminary  view  of  the  French 
Revolution.  By  the  author  of  Waverley.  9  vols. 
Edinburgh. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY  L59 

Chronicles  of  the  Canongate.     First  series: 
The  Highland  Widow. 
The  Two  Drovers. 
The  Surgeon's  Daughter. 

Memoirs  of  the  Marchioness  de  la  Rochejaquelin.  Trans- 
lated from  the  French.  Edinburgh.  (Constable's 
Miscellany,  Vol.  V.    Introduction  and  notes  by  Scott.) 

The  Miscellaneous  Prose  Works  of  Sir  Walter  Scott. 

6  vols.     Edinburgh,  1827,  and  Boston,  1829. 
9  vols.     Paris,    1827-34. 

30  vols.  London,  1834-46.  (Containing  many  of  the  reviews 
contributed  by  Scott  to  periodicals.) 

Same,  first  28  vols.  (Omitting  the  Letters  on  Demonology  and 
Witchcraft.)     Edinburgh,  1842-6,  1851,  and  1861. 

7  vols.     Paris,  1837-8. 

8  vols.     Paris,  1840? 

3  vols.     Edinburgh,  1841-2,  1846,  and  1854. 

1827-55  The  Bannatyne  Miscellany ;  containing-  original 
papers  and  tracts  relating  to  the  history  and  literature 
of  Scotland.  (Edited  by  Sir  Walter  Scott,  D.  Laing, 
and  T.  Thomson.)     3  vols. 

1828     Tales  of  a  Grandfather.     First  series.     3  vols.     Edin- 
burgh. 
Religious  Discourses.     By  a  layman.     London. 

Two  sermons  written  by  Sir  Walter  for  George  Huntly  Gordon, 
then  a  Probationer.  Afterwards  published  by  Gordon,  with  the 
author's  permission,  to  raise  money. 

Chronicles  of  the  Canongate.     Second  series : 
The  Fair  Maid  of  Perth. 

Proceedings  in  the  Court-martial  held  upon  John,  Mas- 
ter of  Sinclair,  captain-lieutenant  in  Preston's  regi- 
ment, for  the  murder  of  Ensign  Schaw  of  the  same 
regiment,  and  Captain  Schaw,  of  the  Royals,  17  Oc- 
tober, 1708;  with  correspondence  respecting  that 
transaction.     Edinburgh. 

Edited  by  Sir  Walter  Scott  and  presented  by  him  to  the  Rox- 
burghe  club.  Some  of  the  same  material  seems  to  have  been 
used  in  the  book  named  below : 

Memoirs  of  the  Insurrection  in  1715,  by  John,  Master  of  Sin- 
clair. With  notes  by  Sir  Walter  Scott.  Edinburgh,  1858,  printed 
for  the  Abbotsford  Club. 


160  SCOTT   AS   A   CRITIC   OF   LITERATURE 

1829  Papers  relative  to  the  Regalia  of  Scotland.     Edinburgh. 

Edited  by  Sir  Walter  Scott  and  presented  to  the  mem- 
bers of  the  Bannatyne  Club  by  William  Bell,  Esq. 
Memorials  of  George  Bannatyne,   1 545-1 608.     Edited 
by  Sir  Walter  Scott  for  the  Bannatyne  Club.     Edin- 
burgh. 

Scott  wrote  the  memoir  of  George  Bannatyne  which  occupies 
the  first  25  pages  of  the  book.  This  memoir  is  also  to  be  found  in 
the  publications  of  the  Hunterian  Club,  part  8,  published  in  1886. 

Anne  of  Geierstein. 

Tales  of  a  Grandfather.     Second  series. 

1829-32     Novels,  Tales,  and  Romances,  with  introductions  and 

notes  by  the  author.     (The  "  Opus  Magnum.") 

The  same  material  is  used  in  the  following  books: 
Introductions  and  notes  and  illustrations  to  the  novels,  tales, 
and  romances  of  the  author  of  Waverley.  3  vols.,  Edinburgh,  1833. 
Autobiography  of  Sir  Walter  Scott.  Philadelphia,  1831.  Ander- 
son, in  his  bibliography  of  Scott,  gives  this  as  a  supposititious 
work,  but  with  the  exception  of  the  title  it  is  genuine,  for  it  is 
simply  the  piecing  together  of  Scott's  introductions  to  his  novels. 

1830  Tales  of  a  Grandfather.     Third  series. 

The  Doom  of  Devorgoil,  and  Auchindrane  or  The  Ayr- 
shire Tragedy. 

Letters  on  Demonology  and  Witchcraft,  addressed  to  J. 
G.  Lockhart,  Esq.     London.     (The  Family  Library.) 

Other  editions :  New  York,  1845  '■>  London,  1868  and  1876,  (illus- 
trated by  Cruikshank)  ;  London  1884,  with  an  introduction  by 
Henry  Morley.  Included  in  the  30  vol.  edition  of  the  Miscel- 
laneous Prose  works,  but  not  in  the  28  vol.  edition. 

Poems,  with  prefaces  by  the  author.  11  vols.  Intro- 
ductory Remarks  on  Popular  Poetry  (prefixed  to  Min- 
strelsy, Vol  I)  and  Essay  on  Imitations  of  the  An- 
cient Ballad  (prefixed  to  Minstrelsy,  Vol.  III). 

These  essays  were  printed  in  1830  and  attached  to  the  edition  of 
the  poems  then  on  sale.  They  were  first  regularly  included  in  the 
edition  of  1833. 

The  History  of  Scotland.  (Lardner's  Cabinet  Cyclo- 
pedia.) 2  vols.  London.  [Not  in  the  Miscella- 
neous Prose  Works.] 

1 83 1  Tales   of  a   Grandfather.     Fourth   series.     History   of 

France. 


r.Il'.LIOC.KAlMIY 


L61 


The  Life  of  Samuel  Johnson,  LL.D.,  including  a  Journal 
of  his  Tour  to  the  Hebrides,  by  James  Boswell,  Esq. 
New  edition  with  numerous  anecdotes  and  notes  by 
The  Right  Hon.  John  Wilson  Croker,  M.P.  .  .  .  10 
vols.  London.  [Scott  wrote  and  signed  the  notes 
for  the  Tour  to  the  Hebrides.] 

Trial  of  Duncan  Terig,  alias  Clerk,  and  Alexander  Bane 
Macdonald,  for  the  murder  of  Arthur  Davis,  Sergeant 
in  General  Guise's  regiment  of  foot.  June,  A.  D. 
1754.     Edinburgh. 

"To  the  members  of  the  Bannatyne  Club,  this  copy  of  a  trial, 
involving   a    curious   point   of   evidence,    is    presented,   by   Walter 
Scott."    There   is   an   introduction   of    11    pages,    giving  the   story 
of  the  crime,  and  bringing  together  instances  from  literature  and 
history  of  the  evidence  of  ghosts  being  cited  in  trials.     That  is 
the    "  curious    point   of    evidence "    referred    to.     The    proceedings 
of  the  court  are  then  reprinted  without  annotation. 
1832     Tales  of  my  Landlord.     Fourth  series: 
Count  Robert  of  Paris. 
Castle  Dangerous. 
1848     Two  Bannatyne  Garlands  from  Abbotsford. 

This  little  book  was  prepared  for  members  of  the  Bannatyne 
club  by  the  secretary,  D.  Laing.  It  contains  two  ballads— of  which 
one  is  ancient  and  one  a  modern  imitation  written  by  Robert 
Surtees — annotated  by   Scott. 

1889  Reliquiae  Trottosienses,  or  Catalogue  of  the  Gabions  of 

the  late  Jonathan  Oldbuck.  (Partially  published  in 
Harper's  Magazine  for  April,  1889:  Vol.  lxxviii,  pp. 
778-788.  This  fragment  describing  the  main  apart- 
ments at  Abbotsford  is  the  only  part  of  the  Reliquiae 
Trottosienses  that  has  been  printed.  There  is  a  short 
introduction  by  Mary  Monica  Maxwell  Scott.) 
The  same  material  was  included  in  the  following  book : 
Abbotsford,  the  personal  relics  and  antiquarian  treasures  of  Sir 

Walter  Scott,  described  by  the  Hon.  Mary  Monica  Maxwell  Scott. 

London,  1S93. 

1890  The  Journal  of  Sir  Walter  Scott,  from  the  original  man- 

uscript at  Abbotsford.     (Edited  by  David  Douglas.) 
2  vols.     Edinburgh. 

Second    edition,    1891.     Large    extracts    from    this    Journal    had 
previously  been  published  in  Lockhart's  Life  of  Scott. 
11 


162  SCOTT   AS    A   CRITIC    OF    LITERATURE 

2.  Contributions  to  Periodicals. 

(a)  Reviews 

(Most  of  these  essays  are  reprinted  in  the  28  and  30  volume 
editions  of  Scott's  Miscellaneous  Prose  Works.  Articles  not  in- 
cluded in  that  collection  are  marked  by  a  note  indicating  the  evi- 
dence on  which  they  are  attributed  to  Scott.) 

1803  Amadis  de  Gaul,  translated  by  Southey  and  by  Rose. 

(Edinburgh  Review,  October.     Vol.  III.) 
Sibbald's   Chronicle  of   Scottish   Poetry.     (Edinburgh, 
October.     Vol.  III.     Not  in  M.  P.  W.     See  Lock- 
hart,  Vol.  I,  p.  335.) 

1804  Godwin's  Life  of  Chaucer.     (Edinburgh,  January.     Vol. 

III.) 

Ellis's  Specimens  of  the  Early  English  Poets.  (Edin- 
burgh, April.     Vol.  IV.) 

The  Life  and  Works  of  Chatterton.  (Edinburgh,  April. 
Vol.  IV.) 

1805  Johnes's   Translation   of   Froissart.      (Edinburgh,   Jan- 

uary.    Vol.  V.) 

Colonel  Thornton's  Sporting  Tour.  (Edinburgh,  Jan- 
uary.    Vol.  V.) 

Fleetwood,  a  novel  by  William  Godwin.  (Edinburgh, 
April.     Vol.  VI.) 

The  New  Practice  of  Cookery.  (Edinburgh,  July. 
Vol.  VI.) 

The  Ossianic  Poems.  (Edinburgh,  July.  Vol.  VI. 
Not  in  M.  P.  W.     See  Lockhart,  Vol.  I,  p.  409.) 

Todd's  Edition  of  Spenser.  (Edinburgh,  October.  Vol. 
VII.) 

1806  Ellis's   Specimens  of  English   Romance,   and   Ritson's 

Ancient   English    Metrical   Romances.     (Edinburgh, 

January.     Vol.  VII.) 
The  Miseries  of  Human  Life.     [By  Rev.  James  Beres- 

ford.]      (Edinburgh,  October.     Vol.  IX.) 
Miscellaneous   Poetry  by  the  Hon.   William   Herbert. 

(Edinburgh,  October.     Vol.  IX.) 


lUl'.LKHiUAI'IIY  L68 

1809  Reliques  of  Burns,  collected  b)  R.  H.  Cromek.     {Quar- 

terly Review,  February.     Vol.  I.) 

Southey's  Translation  of  The  Cid.  (Quarterly,  Feb- 
ruary.    Vol.  I.) 

Sir  John  Carr's  Caledonian  Sketches.  (Quarterly,  Feb- 
ruary.    Vol.  I.) 

Campbell's  Gertrude  of  Wyoming  and  other  poems. 
(Quarterly,  May.     Vol.  I.) 

John  de  Lancaster,  a  novel  by  Richard  Cumberland. 
(Quarterly,  May.     Vol.  I.) 

The  Battles  of  Talavera.  a  poem  [by  John  Wilson 
Croker].     (Quarterly,  November.     Vol.  II.) 

1810  The  Fatal  Revenge  or  The  Family  of  Montorio,  a  ro- 

mance [bv  C.  R.  Maturin].     (Quarterly,  May.    Vol. 
III.) 
Collections  of  Ballads  and  Songs  by  R.  H.  Evans  and 
John  Aiken.     (Quarterly,  May.     Vol.  III.) 

181 1  Southey's    Curse   of   Kehama.     (Quarterly,    February. 

Vol.  V.) 

1815  Emma  and  other  novels  by  Jane  Austen.     (Quarterly, 

October.  Vol.  XIV.  Not  in  M.  P.  W.  See  Lock- 
hart,  Vol.  IV,  p.  3.) 

1816  The  Culloden  Papers.    (Quarterly,  January.   Vol.  XIV.) 
Childe  Harold,  Canto  III,  and  other  poems  by  Lord 

Byron.     (Quarterly,  October.     Vol.  XVI.) 

1817  Tales   of   My   Landlord.      [Probably   written    with   the 

help  of  William  Erskine.  See  Lockhart,  Vol.  Ill,  p. 
81.  See  also  the  Introduction  to  Waverley,  written 
in  1830.]      (Quarterly,  January.     Vol.  XVI.) 

1818  Douglas  on  Military  Bridges.      (Quarterly,  May.     Vol. 

XVIII.     Not  in  M.  P.  W.     See  Lockhart.  Vol.  Ill, 

P-  1730 

Kirkton's  History  of  the  Church  of  Scotland,  edited  by 

C.  K.  Sharpe.     (Quarterly,  May.     Vol.  XVIII.) 
Letters   from   Horace   Walpole   to   George   Montague. 

(Quarterly,  April.     Vol.   XIX.     Not  in   M.   P.  W. 

See  Memoir  of  John  Murray,  Vol.  II,  p.  12.) 
Childe   Harold,   Canto   IV.      (Quarterly,   April.      Vol. 

XIX.) 


164  SCOTT   AS   A   CRITIC   OF   LITERATURE 

Women  or  Pour  et  Contre,  a  tale  [by  C.  R.  Maturin]. 
(Edinburgh,  June.     Vol.  XXX.) 

Frankenstein,  a  novel  [by  Mrs.  Shelley].  (Black- 
wood, March.     Vol.  II.) 

Remarks  on  General  Gourgaud's   Narrative.     (Black- 
wood, November.     Vol.  IV.     Not  in  M.  P.  W.    See 
Lockhart,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  238.) 
1824     The  Correspondence  of  Lady  Suffolk.     (Quarterly,  Jan- 
uary.    Vol.  XXX.) 

1826  Pepys'  Diary.     (Quarterly,  March.     Vol.  XXXIII.) 
Boaden's  Life  of  Kemble,  and  Kelly's  Reminiscences. 

(Quarterly,  June.     Vol.  XXXIV.) 
The  Omen   [by  John  Gait].     (Blackwood,  July.     Vol. 
XX.) 

1827  Mackenzie's  Life  and  Works  of  John  Home.     (Quar- 

terly, June.     Vol.  XXXVI.) 

The  Forester's  Guide,  by  Robert  Monteath.  On  Plant- 
ing Waste  Lands.  (Quarterly, October.  Vol. XXXVI.) 

On  the  Supernatural  in  Fictitious  Composition,  and  par- 
ticularly on  the  Works  of  Hoffman.  (Foreign  Quar- 
terly Review,  July.     Vol.  I.) 

See  also  Contes  Fantastiques  de  E.  T.  A.  Hoffmann,  traduits 
de  1'  Allemand  par  M.  Loeve-Veimars,  et  precedes  d'une  notice 
historique  sur  Hoffmann  par  Walter  Scott.     Paris,  1830.     16  vols. 

1828  The  Planter's  Guide,  by  Sir  Henry  Steuart.     On  Land- 

scape Gardening.  (Quarterly,  March.  Vol.  XXXVII.) 
Sir  Humphrey  Davy's  Salmonia  or  Days  of  Fly-fishing. 

(Quarterly,  October.     Vol.  XXXVIII.) 
Moliere.     (Foreign  Quarterly  Review,  February.     Vol. 

II.) 

1829  Hajji  Baba  in  England;  and  The  Kuzzilbash,  a  tale  of 

Khorasan.     (Quarterly,  January.     Vol.  XXXIX.) 
Ritson's  Annals  of  the  Caledonians,  Picts,  and  Scots,  etc. 

(Quarterly,  July.     Vol.  XLI.) 
Tytler's  History  of  Scotland.     (Quarterly,  November. 

Vol.  XLI.) 
Revolutions   of   Naples   in    1647  and    1648.     (Foreign 

Quarterly  Review,  August.     Vol.  IV.     Not  in  M.  P. 

W.     See  Journal,  Vol.  I,  p.  145,  and  Vol.  II,  p.  278.) 


BIBLIOGRAPHY  1<15 

1830  Southey's  Life  of  John  Bunyan.     (Quarterly,  October. 

Vol.  XLIII.) 

1831  Pitcairn's  Ancient  Criminal  Trials.      (Quarterly,  Feb- 

ruary.    Vol.  XLIV.) 

(b)  Contributions  to  the  Edinburgh  Annual  Register 

(The  dates  given  are  those  on  the  volumes.  In  most  cases  the 
book  was  issued  about  a  year  and  a  half  after  the  nominal  date. 
Most  of  Scott's  contributions  are  unsigned.  Those  which  were 
afterwards  included  in  the  collected  edition  of  his  poems  are  in 
this  list  marked  "Poems";  in  other  cases  (unless  the  article  is 
signed)  a  note  is  made  of  the  reason  for  attributing  it  to  Scott). 

1808  Vol.  I,  part  2. 

The  Bard's  Incantation.     Poems. 

To  a  Lady,  with  Flowers  from  a  Roman  Wall.     Poems. 

The  Violet.     Poems. 

Hunting  Song.     Poems. 

The  Resolve.     Poems. 

View  of  the  changes  proposed  and  adopted  in  the  ad- 
ministration of  justice  in  Scotland.  (See  Lockhart, 
Vol.  II,  p.  154.) 

Living  Poets  of  Great  Britain.  (From  internal  evi- 
dence I  think  this  article  may  have  been  written  by 
Scott,  and  am  sure  that  he  dictated  many  of  the 
opinions  it  expresses,  if  he  is  not  responsible  for  the 
whole.) 

1809  Vol.  II,  part  2. 

The  Vision  of  Don  Roderick.  (Reprinted  from  the  first 
edition.)     Poems. 

Epitaph  designed  for  a  Monument  to  be  erected  in  Lich- 
field Cathedral  to  the  Rev.  Thomas  Seward.     Poems. 

Cursory  remarks  upon  the  French  order  of  battle,  par- 
ticularly in  the  campaigns  of  Buonaparte.  (See 
Lockhart,  Vol.  II,  p.  161.) 

Periodical  Criticism.  (From  internal  evidence  I  am 
sure  that  this  was  written  by  Scott.  The  style  is 
decidedly  more  interesting  than  that  of  the  article  on 
the  poets,  in  the  volume  for  the  preceding  year.) 


166  SCOTT   AS    A   CRITIC   OF   LITERATURE 

The  Inferno  of  Altisidora.  (This  immediately  follows 
the  article  on  Periodical  Criticism,  and  is  a  burlesque 
sketch  on  the  same  subject.  It  serves  to  introduce 
the  following  imitations,  respectively,  of  Crabbe, 
Moore,  and  Scott  himself.) 

The  Poacher. 

"  Oh  say  not,  my  love,  with  that  mortified  air." 

The  Vision  of  Triermain. 

1810  Vol.  Ill,  part  2. 

Account  of  the  poems  of  Patrick  Carey,  a  poet  of  the 
seventeenth  century.  (Afterwards  prefixed  to  the 
volume  of  Carey's  poems  published  in  1820.  See 
Lockhart,  Vol.  II,  pp.  245-8.) 

181 1  Vol.  IV,  part  2. 

Biographical  memoir  of  John  Leyden,  M.D.  (In  the 
Miscellaneous  Prose  Works.) 

1812  Vol.  V,  part  2. 

Extracts  from  a  journal  kept  during  a  coasting  voyage 
through  the  Scottish  Islands.  (Published  in  complete 
form  in  Lockhart,  Vol.  II.) 

1813  Vol.  VI. 

The  Dance  of  Death.     Poems. 

Romance  of  Dunois,  from  the  French.     Poems. 

Song  for  the  anniversary  meeting  of  the  Pitt  Club  of 

Scotland.     Poems. 
Song  on  the  lifting  of  the  banner  of  the  House  of  Buc- 

cleuch,  at   a  great   football  match  on   Carterhaugh. 

Poems. 

1814  Vol.  VII. 

Historical  Review  of  the  Year.     (See  Lockhart,  Vol. 

HI,  P-  76.) 

1815  Vol.  VIII. 

Historical  Review  of  the  Year.     (See  Lockhart,  Vol  III, 

p.  124.) 
The  Search  after  Happiness,  or  the  Quest  of  Sultaun 

Solimaun.     (Reprinted    from    the    S ale-Room.     See 

Lockhart,  Vol.  Ill,  pp.  89-90.) 


muLiOGRAPiiv  L67 

1816.     Vol.  IX. 

The   Noble    Moringer.     Translated   from  the   German. 
Poems.     (See    also    the    introduction    to    The    Be- 
trothed.) 
1817     Vol.  X. 

Farewell  Address,  spoken  by  Mr.  Kemble  to  the  Edin- 
burgh Theatre,  on  the  29th  March,  1817.     (Reprinted 
from  the  Salc-Room.)     Poems. 
1824     Vol.  XVII. 

To  Mons.  Alexandre. 

(c)   Contributions  to  other  periodicals 

Scott  contributed  frequently  to  The  Edinburgh  Weekly 
Journal,  edited  and  published  by  James  Ballantyne.  Some  of 
the  articles  are  reprinted  in  the  Miscellaneous  Prose  Works. 
Lockhart  reprints  in  the  Life  Scott's  account  of  the  coronation 
of  George  IV.,  and  his  Reply  to  General  Gourgaud. 

Scott  also  contributed  to  The  Sale-Room,  a  weekly  paper 
edited  and  published  by  John  Ballantyne  from  January  4  to 
July  12,  1817  (28  numbers).     (See  Lockhart,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  89.) 

To  The  Keepsake,  an  annual,  Scott  contributed  in  1828  The 
Tapestried  Chamber,  My  Aunt  Margaret's  Mirror,  and  The 
Laird's  Jock,  and  in  1830  The  House  of  Aspen. 

In  Blackivood's  Edinburgh  Magazine,  Vol.  I,  appeared  three 
articles  entitled  "  Notices  concerning  the  Scottish  Gypsies,"  for 
which  Scott  furnished  a  large  part  of  the  material.  (Numbers 
for  April,  May,  and  September,  1817.)  Lockhart  says  that 
Scott  dictated  to  Thomas  Pringle  "  a  collection  of  anecdotes 
concerning  Scottish  gypsies,  which  attracted  a  good  deal  of 
notice."  The  first  article  refers  to  "  Mr.  Walter  Scott,  a  gen- 
tleman to  whose  distinguished  assistance  and  advice  we  have 
been  on  the  present  occasion  very  peculiarly  indebted,  and  who 
has  not  only  furnished  us  with  many  interesting  particulars 
himself,  but  has  also  obligingly  directed  us  to  other  sources  of 
curious  information."  Scott  quotes  from  the  first  of  the  three 
articles  in  his  review  of  Talcs  of  My  Landlord,  and  he  after- 
wards used  the  same  anecdotes  in  the  introduction  to  Guy 
Mannering. 


168  SCOTT  AS  A  CRITIC  OF  LITERATURE 

3.  Books  which  contain  letters  written  by  Scott. 

(As  there  is  no  complete  collection  of  Scott's  letters  it  has 
been  thought  wise  to  name  the  various  sources,  so  far  as  the 
letters  have  appeared  at  all  in  print,  from  which  such  a  collection 
might  be  made.  The  list  includes  only  those  books  or  articles 
in  which  letters  were  published  for  the  first  time;  yet  it  is  prob- 
ably far  from  exhaustive.  Notes  are  given  in  regard  to  the  num- 
ber or  kind  of  the  letters  from  Scott  to  be  found  in  some  of  the 
less-known  books.) 

Memoirs  of  Sir  Walter  Scott,  by  J.  G.  Lockhart. 

Edinburgh,  7  vols.  1837-8.  10  vols.  1839.  Abridged  edition  1848. 
The  edition  referred  to  throughout  this  study  is  that  published  by 
Macmillan  and  Company  in  5  volumes,   1900. 

Familiar  Letters  of  Sir  Walter  Scott  [edited  by  D.  Douglas]. 

2  vols.     Edinburgh,  1894. 

Letters  and  Recollections  of  Sir  Walter  Scott,  by  Mrs.  Hughes 
(of  Uffington),  edited  by  Horace  G.  Hutchinson. 

London,  1904.  (First  published  in  The  Century,  xliv:  424  and 
566;  July  and  August,   1903.) 

The  Life  and  Letters  of  John  Gibson  Lockhart,  by  Andrew 
Lang,  from  Abbotsford  and  Milton  Lockhart  mss. 
and  other  original  sources. 

2  vols.  London,  1897. 

These  volumes   contain  many   letters   from   Scott  to  Lockhart. 

Memoir  and  Correspondence  of  the  late  John  Murray,  with 
an  account  of  the  origin  and  progress  of  the  House, 

1 768-1843,  by  Samuel  Smiles. 

2  vols.  London,  1891. 

This  book  contains  many  letters  from  Scott  to  Murray,  who 
published  some  of  Scott's  works  and  was  the  proprietor  of  the 
Quarterly  Review. 

Archibald  Constable  and  his  Literary  Correspondents.  A 
Memorial  by  his  son  Thomas  Constable. 

3  vols.  Edinburgh,  1873. 

The  third  volume  is  wholly  taken  up  with  an  account  of  Scott's 
relations  with  Constable,  his  publisher,  and  many  letters  are  given. 
See  also  Vol.  II,  pages  347  and  474. 


BIBLIOGRArilY  L69 

[The  Ballantyne  and  Lockhart  Pamphlets.] 

I.  Refutation  of  the  Misstatements  and  Calumnies  contained 

in  Mr.  Lockhart's  Life  of  Sir  Walter  Scott,  bart.,  re- 
specting the  Messrs.  Ballantyne,  by  the  trustees  and 
son  of  the  late  Mr.  James  Ballantyne.      (1835.) 

II.  The  Ballantyne  Humbug  Handled  by  the  author  of  the 

Life  of  Sir  Walter  Scott.     (1839.) 

III.  Reply  to  Mr.  Lockhart's  Pamphlet,  entitled  "The  Bal- 

lantyne-Humbug  Handled,"  etc.     (1839.) 

The  two  last  pamphlets  contain  numerous  letters  of  Scott's. 
For  a  history  of  Scott's  publishing  operations  these  pamphlets 
should  be  studied  in  connection  with  the  Memoirs  of  Lockhart, 
Murray,  and  Constable. 

Annals  of  a  Publishing  House ;  William  Blackwood  and  his 
sons,  their  magazine  and  friends.     By  Mrs.  Oliphant. 

3rd  edition,  2  vols.     Edinburgh,  1897. 

About  half  a  dozen  letters  not  elsewhere  published  are  given  in 
this  book. 

Letters  from  and  to  Charles  Kirkpatrick  Sharpe,  Esq.,  edited 
by  Alexander  Allardyce,  with  a  memoir  by  Rev.  W. 
K.  R.  Bedford. 

2  vols.     Edinburgh,   1888. 

Lockhart  wrote  to  Sharpe  in  1834:  "He  had  preserved  so  many 
letters  of  yours.  .  .  .  that  I  must  suppose  the  correspondence  was 
considered  by  himself  as  one  not  of  the  common  sort."  (Vol.  II, 
p.  479.)  Both  men  were  authors  and  antiquaries,  and  their  letters 
as  given  in  this  book  illustrate  their  favorite  studies. 

Lady  Louisa  Stuart.  Selections  from  her  manuscripts,  edited 
by  Hon.  James  Home. 

London,  1899.  (One  section  of  the  book  is  entitled  "Unpub- 
lished Letters  of  Sir  Walter  Scott  and  Lady  Louisa  Stuart.") 

Abbotsford  Notanda,  by  Robert  Carruthers.  Subjoined  to  the 
Life  of  Sir  Walter  Scott  by  Robert  Chambers,  edited 
by  W.  Chambers. 

London,  1871. 

Letters  from  Scott  to  Hogg  and  Laidlaw  are  included. 

Memorials  of  Coleorton,  being  letters  from  Coleridge,  Words- 
worth and  his  Sister,  Southey,  and  Sir  Walter  Scott, 


170  SCOTT   AS   A   CRITIC    OF   LITERATURE 

to  Sir  George  and  Lady  Beaumont  of  Coleorton, 
Leicestershire,  1803  to  1834.  Edited,  with  introduc- 
tion and  notes,  by  William  Knight. 

2  vols.   Boston,    1887. 

The  second  volume  contains  three  letters  by  Scott. 

The  Letters  of  Sir  Walter  Scott  and  Charles  Kirkpatrick 
Sharpe  to  Robert  Chambers,  1821-45.  With  original 
memoranda  of   Sir  Walter   Scott,   etc.     [Edited  by 

C.  E.  S.  Chambers.] 
Edinburgh,  1904. 

Reminiscences  of  Sir  Walter  Scott,  by  John  Gibson. 

Edinburgh,  1871. 

Besides  nine  letters  from  Scott  this  book  gives  in  full  a  memorial 
written  by  him  in  regard  to  the  claim  of  Constable's  trustee  on 
Woodstock  and  Napoleon. 

Traditions  and  Recollections,  Domestic,  Clerical,  and  Literary ; 
in  which  are  included  letters  of  Charles  II,  Cromwell-, 
Fairfax,  Edgecumbe,  Macaulay,  Wolcot,  Opie, 
Whitaker,  Gibbon,  Buller,  Courtenay,  Moore,  Down- 
man,  Drewe,  Seward,  Darwin,  Cowper,  Hayley,  Hard- 
inge,  Sir  Walter  Scott,  and  other  distinguished  char- 
acters.    By  the  Rev.  R.  Polwhele. 

2  vols.     London,  1826. 

Vol.  II.  contains  five  letters  from  Scott. 

Letters  of  Sir  Walter  Scott,  addressed  to  the  Rev.  R.  Polwhele ; 

D.  Gilbert,  Esq. ;  Francis  Douce,  Esq. ;  etc. 

London,  1832. 

Twenty-eight  letters  from  Scott  are  given,  of  which  at  least  one 
had  previously  been  published. 

A  Memoir  of  the  Life  and  Writings  of  the  late  William  Taylor 
of  Norwich,  .  .  .  containing  his  correspondence  of 
many  years  with  the  late  Robert  Southey,  Esq.,  and 
original  letters  from  Sir  Walter  Scott,  and  other  emi- 
nent literary  men.  Compiled  and  edited  by  J.  W. 
Robberds,  F.G.S.,  of  Norwich. 

2  vols.     London,   1843. 

Vol.  I.  contains  two  letters  from  Scott,  of  which  the  second  has 
decided  critical  interest.  See  pp.  94-100.  Vol.  II.  has  one  letter 
from  Scott.     See  p.  533. 


BIBLIOGKAPIIV  171 

Memoirs  of  Sir  William  Knighton,  Bart.  G.  C.  II.  .  .  .  includ- 
ing his  correspondence  with  many  distinguished 
personages.     By  Lady  Knighton.     Philadelphia,  1838. 

Fourteen  letters  from  Scott  are  given. 

Letters  between  James  Ellis,  Esq.,  and  Walter  Scott,  Esq. 

Newcastle-upon-Tyne,   1850. 

The  letters  from  Scott  are  two  in  number. 

Haydon's  Correspondence  and  Table-talk,  with  a  Memoir  by 
his  son,  Frederick  Wordsworth  Haydon. 

2  vols.,  London,   1876. 

The  first  volume  contains  a  few  letters  by  Scott. 

The  Life  and  Letters  of  Washington  Irving,  by  his  nephew, 
Pierre  M.  Irving. 

4  vols.,   New  York,  1865. 

Vol.   I,  p.  240,  contains  a  letter  to  Brevoort;  pp.  439-40,  442-4 
and  450-1  contain  three  letters  to  Irving. 

Memorials  of  James  Hogg,  by  M.  G.  Garden. 

London,   1903. 

Four  letters  by  Scott  are  included. 

Memoirs  of  a  Literary  Veteran,  including  sketches  and  anec- 
dotes of  the  most  distinguished  literary  characters 
from  1794  to  1849,  by  R-  P-  Gillies. 

3  vols.    London,  1851. 

Vol.  II,  pp.  77-83,  contains  three  letters  from  Scott;  Vol.  Ill, 
pp.  143-4,  contains  one. 

Sir  Walter  Scott.  The  story  of  his  life,  by  R.  Shelton 
Mackenzie. 

Boston,  1871. 

See  p.  471  for  a  letter  not  published  elsewhere. 

Byron's  Letters  and  Journals.     Rowland  E.  Prothero,  ed. 

6  vols.,  London,   1898-1901. 

See  Vol.  VI,  p.  55  for  a  letter  of  Scott's  not  published  elsewhere. 

Catalogue  of  the  Exhibition  held  at  Edinburgh  in  July  and 
August,  1871,  on  occasion  of  the  commemoration  of 
the  centenary  of  the  birth  of  Sir  Walter  Scott. 

Edinburgh,  1872. 

This  catalogue  contains  notices  of  the  autograph  letters  which 
were  exhibited,  and  prints  a  few  of  the  letters. 


172  SCOTT   AS   A    CRITIC   OF   LITERATURE 

A  Critical  Dictionary  of  English  Literature  and  British  and 
American  Authors.  ...  By  S.  Austin  Allibone. 

3  vols.     Philadelphia,  1870. 

Two  letters  from  Scott  to  Ticknor  are  given  in  the  article  on 
Scott. 

Fragments  of  Voyages  and  Travel,  by  Basil  Hall.  Third 
series. 

Chapter  I.  contains  a  letter  written  by  Scott  in  the  original 
manuscript  of  The  Antiquary,  explaining  why  the  author  particu- 
larly liked  that  novel. 

Letters,  hitherto  unpublished,  written  by  members  of  Sir  Wal- 
ter Scott's  family  to  their  old  governess.  Edited, 
with  an  introduction  and  notes,  by  the  Warden  of 
Wadham  College,  Oxford. 

London,  1905. 

See  pp.  13-15  for  a  letter  from  Scott,  and  pp.  37-38  for  a  note 
of  instructions  in  regard  to  his  daughter  Sophia's  history  lessons. 

Correspondence  between  J.  Fenimore  Cooper  and  Sir  Walter 
Scott. 

The  Knickerbocker  Magazine,  xi:38o;  April,  1838. 

The  letter  from  Scott  to  Cooper  quoted  above,  p.  102,  is  here  given. 

Fiction,  Fair  and  Foul.     By  John  Ruskin. 

Nineteenth  Century,  viii :   195 ;  August,   1880. 
A  footnote  on  pp.  196-7  contains  fragments  of  five  letters  from 
Scott  to  the  builder  of  Abbotsford. 

Wordsworth's  Poetical  Works.     Edited  by  William  Knight. 

11   vols.     Edinburgh,    1882. 

See  the  index.  Vol.  XI,  p.  196  has  a  letter  from  Scott  which  I 
think  had  not  previously  been  published.  Vol.  X,  p.  105,  gives 
one  which  Lockhart  quotes  "  very  imperfectly,"  according  to  Prof. 
Knight. 

Portraits  of  Illustrious  Personages  of  Great  Britain  .  .  .  with 
biographical  and  historical  memoirs  of  their  lives  and 
actions,  by  Edmund  Lodge. 

London,  1835. 

Vol.  I  contains,  in  the  appendix  to  the  preface,  a  letter  from 
Scott  to  the  publisher,  dated  25th  March  1828.  (See  Lockhart, 
V  350.) 


BIBLIOGRATIIY  173 

The  Life  and  Letters  of  Maria  Edge-worth,  edited  by  Augustus 
J.  C.  Hare. 

2  vols.     Boston,  1895. 

This  contains  a  few  letters  of  Scott's,  but  only  one  which  is 
not  published  elsewhere. 

A  Short  Account  of  successful  exertions  in  hehalf  of  the  fath- 
erless and  widows  after  the  war  in  1814;  containing 
letters  from  Mr.  Wilberforce,  Sir  Walter  Scott,  Mar- 
shal Bliicher,  etc.     By  Rudolf  Ackermann. 

Oxford,    1871. 

There  is  only  one  letter  by  Scott. 

The  Courser's  Manual,  etc.,  by  T.  Goodlake.     1828. 

This  book  contains  one  letter  by  Scott,  dated  16th  October, 
1828,  about  an  old  Scottish  poem  entitled  "  The  Last  Words  of 
Bonny  Heck."  (See  Lockhart,  V.  219,  for  what  is  doubtless  the 
same  letter.) 

The  Chimney-sweeper's  Friend  and  Climbing-boy's  Album. 
Arranged  by  James  Montgomery. 

London,  1824. 

The  Preface  contains  part  of  a  letter  from  Scott,  in  which  he 
describes  the  construction  of  the  chimneys  at  Abbotsford.  (See 
Lockhart,  IV.  158-9.) 


APPENDIX  II. 

1.  Bibliographies  of  Scott 

Allibone,  S.  A.  Dictionary  of  British  and  American  Authors 
and  Literature.     3  vols.     Phil.,  1870. 

Anderson,  J.  P.  Bibliography  of  Scott,  in  the  Life  of  Scott  by 
C.  D.  Yonge  (Great  Writers  Series).     London,  1888. 

Lockhart's  Life  of  Scott;  the  Centenary  Catalogue  (see  above, 
p.  171)  ;  the  British  Museum  Catalogue;  the  Diction- 
ary of  National  Biography. 

2.  A  partial  list  of  the  books  used  in  the  preparation  of  this 

Study,  aside  from  those  given  in  the  bibliography  of 
Scott's  works.  (See  particularly  the  list  of  books 
which   contain   letters   written   by    Scott:   Appendix 

I.  30 

Adolphus,  J.  L.  Letters  to  Richard  Heber,  Esq.,  containing 
critical  remarks  on  the  series  of  novels  beginning  with 
"  Waverley,"  and  an  attempt  to  ascertain  their  author. 
Second  edition.     London,  1822. 

Aitken,  G.  A.,  ed.  Romances  and  Narratives  by  Daniel  Defoe. 
16  vols.     London,  1895. 

Arnold,  Matthew.  Byron.  In  Essays  in  Criticism.  Second 
series.     London,  1889. 

Carlyle,  Thomas.  Sir  Walter  Scott.  In  Critical  and  Miscel- 
laneous Essays.     4  vols.     London,  1857. 

Chambers,  E.  K.    The  Mediaeval  Stage.    2  vols.    Oxford,  1903. 

Chesterton,  G.  K.     Varied  Types.     New  York,  1903. 

Child,  Francis  J.     English  and  Scottish  Popular  Ballads.     5 

vols.     Boston,  1882-96. 

English  and  Scottish  Popular  Ballads,  edited  from  the 

collection  of   Francis  James   Child  by   Helen  Child 

Sargent  and  George  Lyman  Kittredge.     Boston,  1904. 

Clemens,  S.  L.  (Mark  Twain).  Life  on  the  Mississippi. 
Boston,  1883. 

174 


BIBLIOGRAPHY  I  75 

Cockburn,  Henry.      Memorials  of  I  lis  'rime.      Kdinburgh,  1874. 

Coleridge,    S.   T.     Specimens  of   tbe   Table   Talk   of   Samud 
Taylor  Coleridge.     2  vols.     London,  1835. 
Letters  of  Samuel  Taylor  Coleridge,  edited  by  E.  II. 
Coleridge.     2  vols.     Boston,  1895. 

Collins,  J.  Churton.     Ephemera  Critica.     London,  1901. 

Courthope,  W.  J.     A  History  of  English  Poetry.    4  vols.    New 
York,  1895-1903. 
The  Liberal  Movement  in  English  Literature.     London, 
1885. 

Cunningham,  Allan.     Life  of  Scott.     Boston,  1832. 

Dowden,  Edward.  Life  of  Percy  Bysshe  Shelley.  2  vols. 
London,  1886. 

Fitzgerald,  Percy.  New  History  of  the  English  Stage,  from 
the  Restoration  to  the  liberty  of  the  theatres,  in  con- 
nection with  the  patent  houses.    2  vols.     London,  1882. 

Forster,  John.  Walter  Savage  Landor,  a  biography.  2  vols. 
London,  1869. 

Freeman,  E.  A.  The  History  of  the  Norman  Conquest  of 
England.     5  vols.     New  York,  1873. 

Gates,  L.  E.     Three  Studies  in  Literature.     New  York,  1899. 

Gillies,  R.  P.  Recollections  of  Sir  Walter  Scott.  (Republished 
in  book  form  from  Frascr's  Magazine,  Sept.,  Nov., 
Dec,  1835,  and  Jan.,  1836.) 

Hazlitt,  William.  Collected  Works,  edited  by  A.  R.  Waller  and 
Arnold  Glover.  12  vols.  London,  1902-4.  (Spirit 
of  the  Age,  Vol.  IV;  Plain  Speaker,  Vol.  VII;  Dra- 
matic Essays,  Vol.  VIII.) 

Herford,  C.  H.  The  Age  of  Wordsworth.  (Handbooks  of 
English  Literature.)     London,  1905. 

Hogg,   James,    ed.     Jacobite    Relics    of    Scotland,    being   the 
songs,  airs,  and  legends  of  the  adherents  of  the  House 
of  Stuart.     2  vols.     Edinburgh.  1819-21. 
Domestic  Manners  and  Private  Life  of  Sir  Walter  Scott. 
Glasgow,  1834. 

Hudson,  W.  H.     Sir  Walter  Scott,  London,  1901. 

Hunt,  J.   H.   Leigh.     Autobiography ;   with    reminiscences   of 


176  SCOTT   AS   A   CRITIC    OF   LITERATURE 

friends    and    contemporaries.     2    vols.     New    York, 

1850. 
Feast  of  the  Poets.     London,  1814. 
Lord  Byron  and  some  of  his  contemporaries.     Second 

edition.     2  vols.     London,  1828. 
Hutton,  R.  H.     Sir  Walter  Scott.     (English  Men  of  Letters.) 

New  York,  1878. 
Irving,  Washington.    Abbotsford  and  Newstead  Abbey.     (First 

volume  of  the  "  Crayon  Miscellany.")     London,  1835. 
Lang,   Andrew.     Sir  Walter   Scott    (Literary   Lives).     New 

York,  1906. 
Border  edition  of  the  Waverley  Novels,  48  vols.     Lon- 
don, 1 892-1 894. 
Laing,  Malcolm,  ed.     Poems  of  Ossian,  containing  the  poetical 

works  of  James  MacPherson  in  prose  and  verse.     2 

vols.     Edinburgh,  1805. 
Legare,  H.  S.     Writings.  .  .  .  Edited  by  his  sister.     Charles- 
ton, S.  C,  1846. 
Lounsbury,  T.  R.     James  Fenimore  Cooper.     (American  Men 

of  Letters.)     Boston,  1882. 
Maigron,  Louis.     Le  Roman  Historique  a  l'fipoque  Roman- 

tique :  essai  sur  l'influence  de  Walter  Scott.     Paris, 

1898. 
Masson,  David.     British  Novelists  and  Their  Styles.     Cam- 
bridge, Eng.,  1859. 
Matthews,  Brander.     The  Historical  Novel,  etc.     New  York, 

1901. 
Meteyard,  Eliza.     A  Group  of  Englishmen  (i795-i8i5),being 

records  of  the  younger  Wedgwoods  and  their  friends. 

London,  1871. 
Millar,  J.   H.      The   Mid-Eighteenth   Century.      (Periods  of 

European  Literature.)     New  York,  1902. 
Moore,  Thomas.     Letters  and  Journals  of  Lord  Byron,  with 

notices  of  his  life.     2  vols.     London,  1830. 
Myers,  F.  W.  H.     Wordsworth.     (English  Men  of  Letters.) 

New  York,  1881. 
Newman,  J.  H.     Apologia  Pro  Vita  Sua.     London,  1892. 
Nichol,  John.     Byron.     (English  Men  of  Letters.)     New  York, 

1880. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY  177 

Palgrave,  F.  T.  Biographical  and  Critical  Memoir  of  Sir 
Walter  Scott.  (In  Foctical  Works  of  Scott.  Lon- 
don, 1866,  Macmillan  and  Company.) 

Paris,  Gaston.  La  Litterature  Franchise  au  Moyen  Age. 
Paris,  1890. 

Percy,  W.  Reliques  of  Ancient  English  Poetry,  consisting  of 
old  heroic  ballads,  songs,  and  other  pieces  of  our 
earlier  poets  (chiefly  of  the  lyric  kind)  together  with 
some  few  of  later  date.     3  vols.     London,  1765. 

Pierce,  E.  L.  Memoirs  and  Letters  of  Charles  Sumner.  2 
vols.     Boston,  1877. 

Ruskin,  John.  Modern  Painters.  New  edition,  5  vols.  Lon- 
don, 1897. 

Saintsbury,  George.     Life  of  Scott.     (Famous  Scots  Series.) 
New  York.     [1897.] 
A  History  of  Criticism  and  Literary  Taste  in  Europe. 
...  3  vols.     New  York,  1900-1904. 

Scott,  Temple,  ed.  The  Prose  Works  of  Jonathan  Swift,  D.D. 
(Bohn's  Standard  Library.)     London,  1898-1905. 

Southey,  Robert.  Selections  from  the  Letters  of  Robert 
Southey,  edited  by  John  Wood  Warter.  4  vols. 
London,  1856. 

Stephen,  Leslie.     English  Literature  and  Society  in  the  Eight- 
eenth  Century.      (Ford   Lectures,    1903.)      London, 
1904. 
Swift.     (English  Men  of  Letters.)     New  York,  1882. 

Taine,  H.  A.  Histoire  de  la  Litterature  Anglaise.  4  vols. 
Paris,  1863-64. 

Ticknor,  George.     Life,  Letters,  and  Journals  of  George  Tick- 
nor.     Sixth  edition.     2  vols.     Boston,  1877. 

White,  A.  D.     Autobiography.     3  vols.     New  York,  1905. 

Wylie,  L.  J.  Studies  in  the  Evolution  of  English  Criticism. 
Boston,  1894. 

3.  Periodicals  and  articles  referred  to,  aside  from  the  articles 
written  by  Scott. 

The  Bibliographer:  Notes   for  a   Bibliography  of   Swift,  by 
Stanley  Lane-Poole.     Vol.  VI,  pp.  160-71. 
12 


178  SCOTT  AS  A  CRITIC  OF  LITERATURE 

The  Edinburgh  Review:  Review  of  The  Minstrelsy  of  the 
Scottish  Border,  Vol.  I,  pp.  395-406;  Review  of  Sir 
Tristrem,  Vol.  IV,  pp.  427-43 ;  Review  of  Scott's 
edition  of  Swift,  Vol.  XXVII,  pp.  1-58 ;  Border  Bal- 
lads, Vol.  CCIII,  pp.  306-26. 

The  English  Historical  Review.  Dean  Swift  and  The  Memoirs 
of  Captain  Carleton,  by  Col.  the  Hon.  Arthur  Parnell, 
R.E.     Vol.  VI,  pp.  97-151. 

Eraser's  Magazine:  Review  of  Letters  on  Demonology  and 
Witchcraft,  Vol.  II,  pp.  507-519. 

The  Knickerbocker  Magazine:  Review  by  J.  Fenimore  Cooper 
of  Lockhart's  Life  of  Scott,  Vol.  XII,  pp.  349  ff. 

Macmillan's  Magazine:  The  Historical  Novel :  Scott  and 
Dumas,  by  Prof.  Saintsbury,  Vol.  LXX,  pp.  321-330. 

The  Nineteenth  Century:  Defoe's  "  Apparition  of  Mrs.  Veal," 
by  G.  A.  Aitken,  Vol.  XXXVII,  pp.  95  ff. 

The  Quarterly  Review:  Review  of  Dunlop's  History  of  Fic- 
tion, Vol.  XIII,  pp.  384-408;  Review  of  Franken- 
stein, Vol.  XVIII,  pp.  37-385 ;  Review  of  The  Lives 
of  the  Novelists,  Vol.  XXXIV,  pp.  349-378. 


IXDKX. 


Abbot,  The,  88,   132,   155 
AbbotsforJ    and    Newstead    Abbey, 

15.    1-6 
AbbotsforJ.   described  by    the  Hon. 

Mary  Monica  Maxwell  Scott,  161 
Abbotsford   Notanda,    169 
Absalom    and    Achitophel,    60,    63- 

4,    66 
Account  of  the  Death  of  Frederick, 

Duke  of    York,   An,    156 
Addison,    Joseph,    80 
Adolphus,     J.     L.,     see     Letters     to 

Heber 
Aeschylus,    50 
Age   of    Wordsworth,    The,    10,    20, 

125,    131,    136,    175 
Aiken's  Collection  of  Songs,  Scott's 

review    of,    26,    163 
Aitken,    G.    A.,    77,    174,    178 
Alastor,   89 

Alexander's    Feast,    63,    139 
Allibone,    S.   A.,    56,    153,    172,    174 
Amadis  de  Gaul,   Scott's   review  of, 

4,    37,    128,    129,    162 
Ancient  British  Drama,   52,    15 1-2 
Ancient  Criminal  Trials,  Scott's  re- 
view  of,    46,    143,    165 
Ancient  English  Metrical  Romances, 

Scott's   review   of,    125,    162 
Ancient  Mariner,  The,  87-8 
Ancient  Times,  149 
Anderson,  J.  P.,  see  Bibliography  of 

Scott 
Annals  of  a  Publishing  Housct   169 
Annals     of     the     Caledonians,     etc., 

Scott's  review  of,    164 
Anne    of    Gcierstcin,     51,     65,     104, 

127,    160 
Antiquary,   The,   3,   50,    51,   89,    154, 

172 
Apologia,    Newman's,    142,    176 
Apology  for  Tales  of  Terror,  147 


Apparition  of  Mrs.  Veal,  The,  76- 
7.     178 

Arbuthnot,  John,   68 

Ariosto,    33,    105 

Aristotle,  53,  54 

Arnold,    Matthew,    95-6,     174 

Auehindranc,  or  The  Ayrshire  Trag- 
edy,   1 60 

Auchinleck  Manuscript,  The,  34,  148 

Auld  Robin  Gray,  157 

Austen,   Jane,   75,    100,    130 

Autobiography   of  Scott,    160 

Bage,  Robert,  73,  75,  79 

Baillie,  Joanna,  46,  85,  97,  98,   114, 

118,    151,   156 
Ballad  Book,   The,   28,    148 
Ballads  and  Lyrical  Pieces,  148 
Ballantyne  and  Lockhart  Pamphlets, 

The,    149,    169 
Bannatyne,  Memoir  of,  44,   160 
Bannatyne    Miscellany,    The,    159 
Barnard,  Lady  Anne,   157 
Bartholomeiv    Fair,    118 
Battle  of  Brunanburgh,  The,  20,  43 
Battles   of  Talavera,   Scott's  review 

of,   106,   112-13,    163 
Beaumont  and  Fletcher,  42,  50,  51, 

52,   56 
Beggar's  Bush,   The,   50 
Beggar's  Opera,   The,  50 
Beozculf,  42 

Berners,  John,   Lord,   128 
Betrothed,    The,    157.    167 
Bibliographer,   The,   67,    177 
Bibliography    of    Scott,    Anderson's, 

174 
Bibliothcquc   Blcuc,    33 
Bibliothcque  de  Romans.  33 
Black  Dicarf.    The.   3,   87,    109,    154 
P.lackmore,     Sir    Richard,    80 
Blackzvood's     Edinburgh     Magazine, 

78,  83,   100,   164,   167,   169 


179 


180 


INDEX 


Blair,    Hugh,    15 

Boaden's    Life    of    Kemble,    Scott's 

review  of,  46,  47,  58,  164 
Boiardo,  33 
Boileau,    136 
Border    Antiquities,    153 
Boswell,  James,  80,   161 
Brennoralt,   51 

Bridal   of   Triermain,   The,   27,    152 
Bride  of  Lammermoor,  The,  3,   34, 

155 
British  Novelists  and   Their  Styles, 

3,   145,   176 
Brome,    Richard,    50 
Broughton,    Hugh,    71 
Brown,    Charles    Brockden,    104 
Buchan,    Peter,    27 
Bunyan,  Scott's  review  of  Southey's 

Life  of,  in,   165 
Burger,    Gottfried,    18,    31,    147 
Burney,    Fanny,     100 
Burns,   Robert,   22,   30,   86,   93,   96 
Burt's   Letters   from   the   North   of 

Scotland,   154 
Butler,    Samuel,    64 
Byron,    George    Gordon,    Lord,    11, 

50,  86,  88-9,  91,  92-6,  97,  98,  99, 

101,  104,   105,  106,   no,   121,  129, 

143,  163,    171,    176 

Cadyow  Castle,  30 

Cain,    95 

Caledonian  Sketches,  Scott's  review 

of,    84,    163 
Calprenede,  53,  76 
Campbell,  Thomas,  96,  no,  118,  163 
Carey,    Patrick,    155 
Carey,  Robert,  Memoirs  of,  149,  151 
Carleton,   Captain,  Memoirs  of,   68, 

144,  148,   178 

Carlyle,  Thomas,   125,  131,  144,  174 
Carr,   Sir  John,   84,    163 
Cartwright,    William,    50 
Castle  Dangerous,    18,   34,    161 
Castle  of  Otranto,  The,  76 
Catalogue   of    the   Centenary   Exhi- 
bition,   147,    151,    171,    174 
Chambers,    E.    K.,    21,    174 
Chambers,    Robert,    50,    169,    170 
Changeling,   The,   56 


Chapman,    George,    50 

Chase,   The,  31,   147 

Chatterton,  Scott's  review  of  the 
Life  and  Works  of,  43,  162 

Chaucer,  43,  44-5,  62t  162 

Chesterton,    G.    K.,    n,    174 

Childe  Harold,  14,  88,  93,  94,  95, 
129,    163 

Child,    Francis    J.,    24,    28,    31,    174 

Chimney-Sweeper's    Friend,    173 

Chivalry,    Essay    on,    36,    46,    154 

Christabel,   62,   86-7,   88 

Christie,  W.   D.,   60 

Chronicles  of  the  Canongate,  2,  3, 
80,   119,   129,   159 

Chronological  Notes  of  Scottish  Af- 
fairs, 156 

Chrononhotonthologos,    50 

Cid,  The,  Scott's  review  of,  92,  163 

Clarissa  Harlowe,   74 

Clemens,   Samuel  L.,   142,   174 

Clifford,    Arthur,    149 

Cock  and  the  Fox,  The,  45 

Cockburn,  Henry,   15,   175 

Coleridge,  Samuel  Taylor,  n,  22, 
51,  86-9,  90-91,  92,  106,  135,  137, 
138,    169,    175 

Collins,   Churton,   68,   143-4,   I75 

Colvin,    Sidney,    100 

Congreve,    William,    57,    60 

Conquest  of   Granada,   The,   57 

Constable,  Archibald,  Literary  Cor- 
respondence of,  12,  33,  48,  52, 
98,  104,  121,  126,  127,  154,  158, 
168,    169 

Conybeare,   John  J.,   42 

Cooper,  J.  Fenimore,  14,  101-3,  172, 
178 

Correspondence  of  Lady  Suffolk, 
Scott's   review  of,    142,    164 

Count  Julian,  99 

Count  Robert  of  Paris,  161 

Courser's  Manual,  The,   173 

Courthope,   W.   J.,    21,    141,    175 

Cowley,   Abraham,    59,    64 

Cowper,    William,    64 

Crabbe,   George,  97,    166 

Craik,    Sir   Henry,   68 

Critic,    The,    50 

Croker,   J.    W.,    161,    163 


INDEX 


LSI 


Cromck's  Reliques  of  Burns,  Scott's 
review   of,   -'-,   86,    163 

Cullodcn  Papers,  Scott's  review  of, 
45.   163 

Cumberland,    Richard,    73,    163 

Cunningham,  Allan,  47-8,  81-2,  06, 
1/5 

Curse  of  Kehatna,  The,  Scott's  re- 
view  of,   91,   92,    163 

Dante,    33,    92 

Darkness,   88-9 

Davy,  Sir  Humphrey,  see  Salmonia 

Dean  Swift  and  the  Memoirs  of 
Captain    Carle  ton,  68,  144,  148,  178 

Defoe,  Daniel,  71,  73,  76-7,  148-9, 
156,    178 

Dekker,    Thomas,    50,    56 

Demonology  and  Witchcraft,  Let- 
ters on,  45,  104,  138,  160,  178 

De  Quincey,  Thomas,  99 

Derrick,   John,   71,    150 

Description  of  the  Regalia  of  Scot- 
land,  155 

Diable  Boiteux,  he,   74 

Dictionary  of  British  and  American 
Authors,  56,    153,    172,    174 

DTsraeli,  Isaac,  20,  142 

Domestic  Manners  and  Private  Life 
of  Sir  Walter  Scott,   114,    175 

Don   Juan,   95 

Donne,  John,  62 

Don    Quixote,    33 

Doom  of  Devorgoil,  The,  46-7,  48, 
160 

Douce,    Francis,   20 

Douglas,  47,   51,    in 

Douglas,   David,   161,   168 

Douglas  on  Military  Bridges,  Scott's 
review  of,   163 

Dowden,    Prof.   Edward,   91,    175 

Drama,  Essay  on,  50,  52-9,  136,  154 

Drapier's  Letters,   The,  69 

Drayton,   Michael,   62 

Drelincourt's  Defence,   etc.,    76-7 

Dryden,  John,  44,  59-65,  93.  112,  145 

Dryden's  Works,  edited  by  Scott, 
2,  5,  7,  36,  44-5,  50,  51,  52-8, 
59-65,  66,  70,  73,  80,  126,  131, 
136,    139,    MS,    149 


Dunbar,    William,  44,    143-4 
Dunlop,  J.   C,   73,    178 
Dyce,   Alexander,   55 

l'luTly,    Felix,   2 

Edgeworth,  Maria,  75,  76,  97,  100, 
101,    103,    173 

Edinburgh  Annual  Register,  The,  6, 
26,   85,   91,    118,    141,    155,    165-7 

Edinburgh  Review,  4,  5,  18,  25,  26, 
29,  31,  35,  36,  38,  40,  43,  44,  46, 
61,  69,  82,  84,  91,  125,  128,  129, 
134,    135,    162,    164,    178 

Edinburgh  Weekly  Journal,  The, 
155,    156,    157,    167 

Elliott,   Hon.    Fitzwilliam,    25 

Ellis,  George,  4,  20,  34,  35,  43,  44, 
58,   60,   91,    113,    162 

Ellis,  James,  Letters  of  Scott  to,  171 

Emma,  Scott's  review  of,   100,   163 

Encyclopaedia  Britannica,  37,  46, 
52,    154 

English  and  Scottish  Popular  Bal- 
lads, 24,  28,  31,  174 

English  Historical  Review,  The,  68, 
144,    148,    178 

English  Literature  and  Society  in 
the  Eighteenth   Century,  g7,   177 

English    Minstrelsy,    151 

Ephemera   Critica,    143-4,    175 

Evans's  Old  Ballads,  Scott's  re- 
view  of,    26,    163 

Eve  of  St.  John,  The,  30,  147 

Evergreen,  The,  28 

Eyrbyggja  Saga,  The,  42,  152 

Fables,  Dryden's,  44-5,  64 

Fair  Maid  of  Perth,  The.  159 

Fair  Maid  of  the  Inn,  The,  50 

Family   Legend,   The,   46 

Familiar  Letters  of  Sir  Walter 
Scott,  5,  13,  14.  33,  37,  40,  47, 
50,  62,  80,  84,  85,  87,  89,  96,  97, 
103,  104,  108,  no,  114.  115,  116, 
118,    120,    138,    143,    168 

Fatal  Revenge,  The,  Scott's  review 
of,    163 

Faust,  104 

Faustus,   55 

Ferdinand,   Count  Fathom,   74 


182 


INDEX 


Fergusson,    Robert,    86 

F  err  ex  and   Porrex,   54 

Ferrier,    Susan,    100 

Fielding,    Henry,    73,    74,    75-6,    78- 

9,    no 
Field  of  Waterloo,   The,   121,    153 
Fitzgerald,    Percy,    49,    175 
Fleetzvood,  Scott's  review  of,   162 
Fletcher,  John,  42,   50,  51,   52,   56 
Fletcher,    Phineas,    64 
Ford,  John,   50,    56 
Foreign    Quarterly   Review,    57,    58, 

105,    132,    133,    164 
Forester's    Guide,    The,    Scott's    re- 
view of,   164 
Forster,    John,    85,    91,    98-9,    175 
Fortunes  of  Nigel,  The,  27,  47,  48, 

49,  S1.  77,  108,  no,  in,  118,  119, 

128,    131,    157 
Fouque,    Baron   de    la    Motte,    105 
Fragmenta   Regalia,   55,    149 
Fragments  of    Voyages  and   Travel, 

172 
France,   Anatole,    127 
Franck,  Richard,    155 
Frankenstein,  78,  89,  164,  178 
Fraser's  Magazine,  85,  106,  130,  138, 

143,  146,   175,  178 
Freeman,    Edward,    126,    127,    175 
Frere,  John  Hookham,   20,  35 
Froissart,   36,    128,    162 

Gait,    John,    129,    164 

Gammer    Gurton's  Needle,    54 

Gates,  Prof.  L.  E.,  134,   135,  175 

Gay,    John,    128 

Gebir,  98 

Gertrude  of  Wyoming,  Scott's  re- 
view of,  82,  96,    163 

Gibson,   John,    170 

Gifford,  William,  50,  52,  83,  84,  134, 
141 

Gilfillan,   George,    1 

Gillies,  R.  P.,  14,  85,  95,  106,  130, 
143,    146,    171,    175 

Glenfinlas,    30 

Godwin,    William,   9,   44,   99 

Godwin's  Life  of  Chaucer,  Scott's 
review  of,  9,  44,  84,   124,    162 


Goethe,   54,   95,    104-5,    125,    147 
Goetz   von   Berlichingen,    54,    147 
Goldsmith,  Oliver,  73,  75 
Gosson,    Stephen,    71 
Gourgaud's  Narrative,  Remarks  on, 

164 
Grammont,    Count,    5,    152 
Gray  Brother,   The,  30 
Greene,    Robert,    55,    71 
Grimm,  Jacob,  21 
Groat' s-worth   of   Wit,   71 
Group  of  Englishmen,  A,  87,  176 
Gulliver's  Travels,  70 
Guy    Mannering,    3,    6,    46,    50,    76, 

117,    120,    121,    153,    167 
Gwynne,  John,  Military  Memoirs  of, 

i57 

Hajji  Baba  in  England,  Scott's  re- 
view of,  164 

Halidon  Hill,  48,   156 

Hall  of  Justice,  The,  97 

Harold  the  Dauntless,  121,  154 

Harper's  Magazine,   161 

Hawkesworth,    John,    65 

Haydon,    B.    R.,    99,    171 

Hazlitt,  William,  49,  51,  85,  99,  114, 
135,    139,    141,    175 

Heart  of  Midlothian,  The,  3,46,  154 

Heber,  Richard,  Letters  to,  10,  15- 
16,  49,  65,  85,  88,  97,  114,  129, 
131,    132,    174 

Hemans,   Mrs.  Felicia,  98 

Henderson's  edition  of  The  Min- 
strelsy of  the  Scottish  Border,  22, 
23,  24-5,  26,  28,  29,  148 

Henry,    Robert,    126 

Herbert,    Lord,    of    Cherbury,    150 

Herbert,  William,  Scott's  review  of 
the   Poems  of,   18,   31,  41,   162 

Herford,  C.  H.,  see  Age  of  Words- 
worth 

Highland   Widow,   The,   120,    159 

Hind  and  the  Panther,  The,  60 

History  of  Criticism,  Saintsbury's, 
146,    177 

History  of  English  Poetry,  Court- 
hope's,     21,     175 

History  of  English  Poetry,  War- 
ton's,    19,   21,    34,   35 


INDEX 


183 


History  of  John  Dull,  68 

History  of  Prose  Fiction,  Dunlop's, 

73,    i/8 
History    of    Queen    Elisabeth's   Fa- 
vourites, 5,   149 
History    of    Scotland,    Scott's,    127, 

160 
History  of  Scotland,  Tytler's,  Scott's 

review  of,  45.    1J4,   164 
History  of  the  Church  of  Scotland, 

Defoe's,  77 
History  of  the  Church  of  Scotland, 

Sharpe's     Kirkton's,     Scott's     re- 
view of,   163 
History  of  the  Norman  Conquest  of 

England,    126,    127,    175 
History  of  the  Years  1814  and  1815, 

6,    166 
Hodgson,   Captain,  Memoirs  of,  148, 

149 
Hoffman,     Scott's     review     of     the 

Works  of,   89,    105,    132,    164 
Hogg,  James,  26,  96,   114,   169,   171, 

1/5 
Home,    Scott's    review    of   the    Life 

of,  15,  80,  82,  106,  164 
Homer,   63,    71,    118,    131 
Horace,   54,  84 
Hours  of  Idleness,  93 
House   of  Aspen,   The,    167 
Hudibras,  64 
Hudson,   W.   H.,    2,    175 
Hughes,    Mrs.,    54,    168 
Hume,    David,    15 

Hunt,  Leigh,  99,   100,   135,  141,   176 
Hutton,    R.    H.,    1,    176 
Hutchinson,  H.  G.,  54,  168 

Iliad,    The,    63,    131 

Illustrations  of  Xorthcrn  Antiqui- 
t  ics,    1 5  2 

Image  of  Ireland,  The,  71,  150 

Imitations  of  the  Ancient  Ballad, 
Essay  on,  19,  30,  41,  42,  88,  115, 
160 

Indian  Emperor,  The,  53 

Introductions,  etc.,  to  the  Novels, 
Tales,  and  Romances,  of  the  Au- 
thor of   Waverley,   160 


IrvinK,    Washington,    15,    97,    101, 

103    4.    1  '7.    M.i.    '7'.    176 

Ivanhoe,  6,  87,  108,  120,  126,  127, 
128,   142,    155 

Jacobite   Relics,   26,    175 

Jamieson,   Robert,  42,  152,  154 

JelTrey,  Francis,  4,  69,  83,  84,  93, 
134    5 

Jests   of  George  Pecle,   71 

Jonathan    Wild,    74 

John  de  Lancaster,  Scott's  review 
of,    163 

Johncs's  Troissart,  Scott's  review  of, 
36,    162 

Johnson,  Samuel,  60,  61,  64,  68,  73, 
74,   79-8o,   102,   128,   135,   137,   161 

Johnstone,    Charles,    73 

Jolly   Beggars,   The,   86 

Jonson,  Ben,  50,  51,  56,   118 

Journal  of  a  Tour  to  the  Hebrides, 
161 

Journal,  Scott's,  12,  38,  51,  56,  84, 
100,  117,  122,  129,  161,  164  (see 
the  footnotes  for  the  many  refer- 
ences   not    here    indexed) 

Judicial  Reform,  Essay  on,  141,  165 

Keats,   John,    11,    100 

Keepsake,  The,   167 

Kelly's  Reminiscences,  Scott's  re- 
view  of,   46,   47,   58,    164 

Kemble,  Scott's  review  of  the  Life 
of,   46,  47,   58,   164 

Kemble,   J.    M.,   43 

Kenilii'orth,    10,   51,   98,    155 

Kinmont   Willie,  24,  26,  31,  148 

Kirk,  Robert,   45,    153 

Kirkto>i's  History,  etc.,  Scott's  re- 
view  of,    163 

Knickerbocker's  History  of  New 
York,  103 

Knickerbocker  Magazine,  The,  102, 
172,    178 

Knight,  Prof.  William,  see  Memo- 
rials of  Coleorton.  and  ll'ords- 
worth 

Knight's  Tale.  The.  44 

Knighton,  Sir  William.   Memoirs  of, 

12,     171 

Kolbing,   E.,   35,   36 


184 


INDEX 


Kuczilbash,   The,  Scott's  review  of, 
164 

Lady  of  the  Lake,  The,  46,  97,  113, 

118,   119,   151 
Lady      Suffolk's      Correspondence, 

Scott's  review  of,  142,  164 
Laird's  Jock,  The,  167 
Laing,  Malcolm,  40,  176 
Lamb,  Charles,  20,  51,  99,   100,   135 
Landor,    Forster's    Life    of,    85,    91, 

98-9,   175 
Landscape  Gardening,  see  Planter's 

Guide 
Lane-Poole,    Stanley,    67,    177 
Lang,    Andrew,    Border   Edition    of 
the  Waverley  Novels,  51,  89, 
108,   158,    176 
Life    of   Lockhart,    52,    84,    99, 

100,    158,    168 
Life    of    Scott,    87,     100,     126, 

127,    176 
Secret  Commonwealth  of  Elves, 
Fauns,   and  Fairies,    153 
Langhorne,   John,   98 
Lay   of   the  Last   Minstrel,   The,   4, 

18,    31,   87,    no,    148 
Lays  of  the  Lindsays,  157 
Lee,  Sidney,   150 
Lee,  William,  77 
Legare,   H.   S.,   94,    176 
Legend  of  Montrose,  A,   51,   155 
Lennox,    Charlotte,     151 
Lenore,  31,    147 
Le   Sage,    73,    74 
Letter    from    Dr.    Tripe    to    Nestor 

Ironside,   67 
Letters  of  Malachi  Malagrowther  on 
the  Currency,  59,  69,  116,  140,  157 
Letters   of   Sir   Walter  Scott,    168- 
173,    see    also    Familiar    Letters, 
Hutchinson,  Polwhele,  and    Stuart, 
Lady   Louisa 
Letters  on  Demonology  and  Witch- 
craft, 45,  104,  160,  178 
Letters  to   Richard  Heber,   etc.,   10, 
15-16,  49,  65,  85,  88,  97,  114,  129, 
131.    132,    174 
Letting   of   Humour's  Blood  in   the 
Head   Vaine,  The,  153 


Levctt,  Robert,  Verses  on  the  Death 
of,  80 

Lewis,   Matthew,   30,  97-8,   147 

Leyden,  John,  25,  30,  166 

Liberal  Movement  in  English  Lit- 
erature,   The,    141,    175 

Life  of  Napoleon  Buonaparte,  The, 
7,  12,  78,  102,  124-5,  I27,  140, 
158,   170 

Life  on  the  Mississippi,   142,  174 

Life  of  Sir  Walter  Scott,  The,  see 
Cunningham,  Gilfillan,  Hudson, 
Hutton,  Lang,  Lockhart,  Mac- 
kenzie,  and   Saintsbury 

Litterature  Frangaise  au  Moyen 
Age,  La,  38,    177 

Little  French  Lawyer,  The,  50 

Lives  of  the  Novelists,  6,  7,  15,  72- 
9,   128,    131,   156,   178 

Lives  of  the  Poets,  74 

Living  Poets  of  Great  Britain,  Ar- 
ticle on,   118,   165 

Livre  de  Mon  Ami,  Le,  127,  175 

Lockhart,  John  Gibson,  6,  22,  25, 
27,  29,  52,  83,  84,  85,  98,  99,  112, 
117,    158,    160,    168,    169 

Lockhart' s  Life  of  Scott,  1,  n,  12, 
I3.  96,  98,  101,  102-3,  112,  148, 
149,  152,  153,  161,  162,  163,  164, 
165,  166,  167,  168,  169,  172,  173, 
174,  178  (see  the  footnotes  for 
the  many  references  not  here  in- 
dexed) 

Lodge,    Edmund,    132,    172 

London,   79 

Lord  Byron  and  Some  of  his  Con- 
temporaries, 99—100,   176 

Lord  of  the  Isles,  The,  120,  153 

Lounsbury,  Prof.  T.  R.,  14,  102,  176 

Love,   87 

Lyly,   John,   61 

Macaulay,  T.  B.,  144 
Macduff's  Cross,  156 
Mackenzie,  Colin,  30 
Mackenzie,    Henry,    17,    73,    75,    100, 

see  also   Home,  John 
Mackenzie,    R.    Shelton,    i,    52,    123, 

139,    171 
Macmillan's  Magazine,  51,   142,   178 


i.\i)i:x 


185 


McNeill,   G.   P.,   35 

Macpherson,   J  anus,   40,   41,    176 

Madoc,  91 

Magnolia,  104 

Maigron,    Louis,    105,    176 

Malachi   Malogrowther,   Letters   of, 

59,  69,  116,  140,  157 
Malone,   Edmund,   60,   61 
Malory,  37 
Manfred,  50,  51 
Mark    Twain.    142,    174 
Marlowe,   Christopher,   55 
Marmion,  5,  6,  31,  90,  93,  97,  no, 

113,   us,   145,   148 
Marston,   John,    50 
Masque  of  Ozcls,  The,  51 
Massinger,  Philip,  56 
Masson,  David,  3,  145,  176 
Mather,    Cotton,    104 
Matthews,   Prof.   Brander,   76,    176 
Maturin,  C.  R.,  138,  163,  164 
Mediaeval  Stage,  The,  21,  174 
Memoirs  of  a  Literary  Veteran,  14, 

171 
Memoirs    of    Captain    Carleton,    68, 

144,  148-9,  178 
Memoirs  of  Captain   Hodgson,   148, 

149 
Memoirs  of  Robert  Carey,  149,   151 
Memoirs   of    the   Court    of   Charles 

IL,  5,   152 
Memoirs     of     the    Insurrection     in 

I/I5,  159 
Memoirs  of  the  Duke  of  Sully,  151 
Memoirs  of   the  Marchioness  de   la 

Rochejaquelin,    159 
Memoirs     of     the     Reign     of     King 

Charles  I.,  5,    152 
Memorials  of  Coleorton,  169 
Memorials    of     George    Bannatync, 

44,  J6o 
Memorials  of  His  Time,  Cockburn's, 

15.    175 
Memorials  of  James  Hogg,   171 
Memorials   of   the   Haliburtons,    155 
Memorie  of  the  Somervillcs,   154 
Merry  Devil  of  Edmonton,  The,  50 
Meteyard,    Eliza,    87,    176 
Meacray's  History   of  France,  80 
Mickle,   W.    J.,   98 


Middleton,    Thomas,    50,   56 
Mid-Eighteenth     Century,    The,    74, 

176 
Millar,   J.   II..   74.    176 
Military  Bridges,  Scott's  review  of, 

163 
Military  Memoirs  of  the  Great  Civil 

War,  5,  157 
Milton,   40,   62,    65,   88,    91,   92,    95, 

104.   143 
Minot,   Laurence,   43 
Minstrelsy   of   the   Scottish   Border, 
3,  4,  7,  17-32,  33,  36,  45,  80,  147- 
8,  160,  178 
Mirror  for  Magistrates,   The,   55 
Miscellaneous  Prose  Works,  Scott's, 
7,  26,  73,  149,  151,  154,  156,  159, 
160,   162,    163,    164,    166,    167 
Miseries  of  Human  Life,  Scott's  re- 
view of,  162 
Modem  British  Drama,  The,  52,  152 
Modern  Painters,   10,  129,  177 
Moliere,   53,   57,   58,   133,    164 
Monastery,  The,  88,   105,   116,    155 
Monk,  The,  98 

Moore,  Thomas,  96,  97,   166,   176 
Murray,  John,   Memoir   and   Corre- 
spondence of,  83,  84,  93,  105,  141, 
142,   163,  168,   169 
My    Aunt    Margaret's   Mirror,    131, 

167 
Myers,  F.  W.  H.,   130,  176 
Mysterious  Mother,   The,   50 

Napoleon,  Scott's  Life  of,  7,  12,  78, 
102,  124-5,   I27,   140,   158,   170 

Nash,  Thomas,  59 

Naunton,  Sir  Robert,   149 

Neidpath  Castle,  Wordsworth's  son- 
net  on,    87 

New  History  of  the  English  Stage, 

49,    175 

Newman,  J.  H.,   142,   176 

New  Practice  of  Cookery,  The, 
Scott's  review  of,  162 

New  Test  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land's Loyalty,  A,  71 

Xichol,   John,    95,    176 

Nichols,    John,    65 


186 


INDEX 


Nineteenth    Century,    The,    77,    172, 

178 
Norman  Conquest  of  England,  The, 

126,   127,   175 
Northern  Antiquities,   42,    152 
Northern  Memoirs,   155 
Notices     concerning     the     Scottish 

Gypsies,   167 
Novelists'  Library,  The,  6,  7,  72-79, 

156 

Ode  on  Scottish  Music,  30 

Oedipe,   53 

Old  Mortality,   36,   62,   77,   89,   109, 

128,    154 
Oliphant,    Mrs.,    169 
Omen,   The,   Scott's   review  of,    164 
Opus  Magnum,   The,   7,   108,    160 
Original    Memoirs    Written    during 

the  Great   Civil   War,  4,   148 
Ossian,   40-41,    162,    176 
Otway,  Thomas,  50,  57,  58 

Paradise  Lost,  95 
Palamon    and    Arcile,    64 
Palgrave,  Francis,  13,  40,  177 
Papers   relative    to    the   Regalia    of 

Scotland,   160 
Paris,    Gaston,    38,    177 
Parnell,   Col.,  the   Hon.  Arthur,  68, 

144,   148,   178 
Parnell,  Thomas,  80 
Paul's   Letters    to    his   Kinsfolk,    6, 

88,   125,   140,   154 
Peele,    George,    55 
Penni   Worth   of   Wit,  A,    148 
Pepys,    Samuel,    65,    142,    164 
Percy,    Thomas,    19,   20,   21,    22,  23, 

26,   28,   32,   34,   37,  38,    177 
Periodical  Criticism,  Article  on,  165 
Petrarch,   33 

Peveril  of  the  Peak,  44,   105,   157 
Pierce,   E.   L.,    177 
Pilot,  The,   101 
Pioneers,    The,    14 
Pinner  of  Wakefield,  The,  59 
Pirate,  The,  3,   117,   125-6,    155 
Pitcaim's   Ancient    Criminal    Trials, 

Scott's  review  of,  46,   143,   165 


Planter's  Guide,  The,  Scott's  re- 
view of,   164 

Planting  Waste  Lands,  Scott's  re- 
view  of,    164 

Plays  on   the  Passions,  50 

Poe,    Edgar   Allan,    109,    no 

Poems,  with  Prefaces  by  the  Au- 
thor,   160 

Polwhele,  R.,  Letters  of  Scott  to, 
132,   148,   170 

Poor  Richard's  Almanac,    104 

Pope,  Alexander,  79,  81,  93,  97, 
106,    113 

Popular  Poetry,  Remarks  on,  19,  22, 
30,    34,    160 

Portraits  of  Illustrious  Personages, 
132,    172 

Prairie,  The,   101 

Prior,    Matthew,    80 

Proceedings  in  the  Court-martial, 
etc.,    159 

Provincial  Antiquities,  6,  56,  59,  155 

Pulci,  33 

Quarterly  Review,  2,  5-6,  20,  22, 
26,  45,  46,  55,  73,  77,  78,  82,  83, 
84,  94,  96,  99,  100,  109,  112,  113, 
114,  124,  129,  140,  143,  163,  164, 
165,  168,  178 
Queenhoo  Hall,  5,  128,  149 
Quentin  Durward,  88,  104,  122,  127, 
157 

Radcliffe,  Mrs.  Anne,  73,  75,  76,  131 

Rambler,   The,  80,    156 

Ramsay,    Allan,    28,    86 

Recollections  of  Sir  Walter  Scott, 
R.  P.  Gillies',  106,  130,  143,  146, 
175 

Redgauntlet,   3,  89,   157 

Red  Rover,  The,   101 

Reeve,  Clara,  73,  76,  78 

Religio  Laid,  64 

Religious  Discourses  by  a  Layman, 
159 

Reliquiae    Trottosienses,    161 

Rcliques  of  Burns,  Scott's  review 
of,  22,  86,   163 

Remarks  on  Gen.  Gourgaud's  Nar- 
rative,   164 


INDliX 


187 


Remarks  on  Popular  Poetry,  19,  22, 

30,  34,   160 

Remarks     on     the     Death     of     Lord 
Byron,  93,  95 

Reminiscences  of  Sir  Waller  Scott, 

John  Gibson's,   170 
Revolutions    of   Xaplcs,    Article    on, 

164 
Richardson.  Samuel,  73,  74~5,  77,  7& 
Ritson,   Joseph,    19,    20,   21,   23,   32, 

34.   37,   38,   39.   45.    162,   164 
Robert    of    Brunne,    34 
Robertson,    William,    15 
Robinson,    Crabbe,    87 
Rob  Roy,  3,  76,   154 
Rogers,    Samuel,    151 
Rokeby,  108,  in,  115,  n6,  152 
Romance,    Essay    on,    34,    37,    38-9. 

42,   46,    146,    154 
Roman    Historique   &    I'Bpoque   Ro- 

mantique,    Le,    105,    176 
Roscommon,    Earl    of,    136 
Rose,   W.    S.,    37,   92,    162 
Rowlands,    Samuel,     153 
Rowley,    43,    50 
Ruskin,  John,    10,    129,    172,    177 

Sackville,   Thomas,   54-5 

Sadler,     Sir    Ralph,    State    Papers 

and  Letters  of,  149 
Saint  Ronan's  Well,  51,  64,  88,  100, 

108,   157 
Saintsbury,  Prof.  George,  2,  51,  53, 

57,  60,  61,  63,   142,   146,    177,   178 
Sale-Room,   The,    166,    167 
Sahnonia,  Scott's  review  of,   164 
Schlegel,  53 

School  of  Abuse,  The,  71 

Scott,   Temple,   67,    177 

Scuderi,  53,   76 

Secret  Commomvealth,  The,  45,  153 

Secret   History   of   One    Year,   The, 

7i 
Secret    History    of    the    Court    of 

James  I.,   5.   55.    152 
Severn,    Joseph,    100 
Seward,  Anne,  30,  85,  89,  91,   151 
Shadwell,   Thomas,   51,    57 
Shakspere,  49,  50,  51,  52,  55-6,  57, 

58,  59,   62,   65,   86,  95,  97,    157-8 


Sharpe,  C.   K.,   27,   28,   30,  31,   66, 

81,  97,  114,  118,  148,  163,  169 
Shelley,  Mrs.  Mary,  78,   163 
Shelley,  P.  B.,  11,  89,  91,  106,   175 
Sheridan,    Thomas,   65 
Shirley,  James,  50,  56 
Short    Account    of    Successful    Ex- 
ertions,   etc.,    173 
Sibbald's    Chronicle,    Scott's    review 

of,  46,    162 
Sir  Eustace  Grey,  97 
Sir  John    Oldcastle,    59 
Sir  Tristrem,  4,  34-6,  39,  42,  43,  56, 

148,   178 
Sketch  Book,  The,  104 
Sketch  of  Lord  Kinneder,   157 
Slingsby.  Sir  H.,  Life  of,   148 
Smith,    Adam,    15 
Smith,    Charlotte,    73 
Smollett,   Tobias,   73.   74,    156 
Somers   Tracts,   The,   4,   6,    60,    63, 

70-72,  126,  150 
Somerville,    Lord,    154 
Southerne,    Thomas,    50 
Southey,  Robert,   4,   20,   37,   46,   49. 
82,    87,    89,    90,    91-2,    93,    96,    98, 
99,    106,    no,    in,    118,    124,    143, 
151,    162,    163,    165,    169,    170,    177 
Spae-Wife,    The,    129 
Specimens    of    Early    English    Ro- 
mances, Scott's  review  of,  125,  162 
Specimens     of     English     Dramatic 

Poets,  20,   51,   99 
Specimens    of     the    Early    English 
Poets,   Scott's   review   of,   43,   44, 
162 
Spenser,   33,   62,   64 
Stael,    Mine,   de,    140 
Stanhope,  Philip,  Earl,  144 
Steele,  Sir  Richard,  67,  120 
Stephen,   Sir  Leslie,   65,   68,  97,   177 
Sterne,    Laurence,    73,    75,    k>3,    156 
Story  of  Rimini,  The,  99 
Strutt,   Joseph,    5,    126,    149 
Stuart,  Lady  Louisa,  Letters  of,   10, 

83,   127,   128,   169 
Studies  in  the  Evolution  of  English 

Criticism,    137,    177 
Suckling,    Sir   John,    51,    59 


188 


INDEX 


Sumner,  Charles,  Memoirs  and  Let- 
ters of,  102,   177 

Supernatural  in  Fictitious  Composi- 
tion,   Th  e,    1 64 

Surgeon's  Daughter,  The,   159 

Surtees,  Robert,  20,  27,  30,  161 

Swift,    Deane,   65 

Swift,  Jonathan,  65-70,  103,  148-9, 
177 

Swift's  Works,  edited  by  Scott,  6, 
7,  65-70,  73,  79,  126,  139,  153,  178 

Taine,  H.  A.,  125,  177 

Tales  of  a  Grandfather,  7,  123,  127, 

141,   159,   160 
Tales  of  My  Landlord,  77,  109,  m- 

12,    128,    132,    154,    155,    161,    163, 

167 
Tales  of  the  Crusaders,  98,  124,  157 
Talisman,   The,    157 
Tapestried  Chamber,  The,  85,  167 
Taylor,    William,    31,    170 
Tender  Husband,  The,   120 
Terry,    Daniel,    46,    49 
Thackeray,  W.  M.,  80,    123 
Thalaba,    91,    135 
Thomas   the   Rhymer,   29,   30,   34-6, 

148 
Thorkelin,    42 
Thornton's    Sporting    Tour,    Scott's 

review  of,  162 
Three    Studies    in    Literature,    134, 

135,    i75 
Ticknor,    George,    15,    56,    103,    144, 

153,    177 
Tieck,    10 
Tierry,    127 
Todd's  Spenser,   Scott's   review   of, 

61,  62,   84 
Tom    Jones,    75 
Traditions    and    Recollections,    etc., 

170 
Tressan,  33,   34 

Trial   of   Duncan   Terig,    The,    161, 
Tristram  Shandy,  75,  156 
Trivial  Poems  and   Triolets,   155 
Troilus  and  Criseyde,  45 


True-born    Englishman,    The,    71 
Trustworthiness  of  Border  Ballads, 

The,  25,   178 
Turner,  Sharon,  42,  126 
Two   Bannatyne   Garlands,   161 
Two  Drovers,  The,  159 
Tytler's  History  of  Scotland,  Scott's 

review  of,  45,   124,   164 
Varied  Types,   n,   174 
Vanity  of  Human   Wishes,  The,   79 
Venis   and  Adonis,   58 
Vicar  of  Wakefield,  The,  75 
Virgin  Queen,  The,  51 
Visionary,    The,    155 
Vision  of  Don  Roderick,  The,   152, 

165 
Voltaire,  78,  105 

Waldron,    Francis,    51 

Wallenstein,   51,   88 

Waller,  Edmund,  64 

Walpole,    Horace,    71,    72,    73,    76, 

150,    163 
Walpole,  Robert,   71 
Walton,    Isaac,    64-5 
War  Song  of  the  Royal  Edinburgh 

Light  Dragoons,  30 
Warton,   Joseph,   60 
Warton,   Thomas,    19,   21,   34,   35 
Warter,    J.    W.,    124,    177 
Warwick,   Sir  Philip,   152 
Waverley,    3,    6,    36,    85,    100,    120, 

122,    123,    125,    149,    153,    163 
Weber,    Henry,   42,    52,    152 
Webster,  John,  50,  55,  56 
White,   Hon.  Andrew,   D.,    127,   177 
William   and   Helen,    147 
Wilson,  John,  50,  83 
Women,  Scott's  review  of,   164 
Women   Pleased,   50 
Woodstock,  44,   51,   141,   157,   170 
Wordsworth,    William,    85,    87,    89- 

91,   92.   93.   97,   98,    106,    130,    143, 

169,    172,    176 
Wylie,  L.  J.,   137,   177 

Yarrow    Revisited,    90 


V 


RETURN     CIRCULATION  DEPARTMENT    j  q  S  ?  i 

TO— ^      202  Main  Library 

LOAN  PERIOD  1 
~     HOME  USE 

2                                3 

4 

5                                ( 

ALL  BOOKS  MAY  BE  RECALLED  AFTER  7  DAYS 

Renewals  and  Recharges  may  be  made  4  days  prior  to  the  due  date. 

Books  may  be  Renewed  by  calling     642-3405. 

DUE  AS  STAMPED  BELOW 

r, 

f& 

V 

A^ 

V 

^ 

UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA,  BERKELEY 
FORM  NO.  DD6                                 BERKELEY,  CA  94720 

IKS' 


II  111  111  111  111  11111 


* 


